From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 00:20:45 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 00:20:45 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164411 > >>Bart: > > > Hogwarts has students from 10-17. Doesn't ANYBODY > > > have sex? ... > >>Betsy Hp: > > Honestly, I think part of it is because these are > > childrens books in the end. ... > >>bboyminn: > While I understand that the above statement is a > generalization and not intended to full define the > universe, I will point out that these are not necessarily > 'Childrens Books'. They are books aimed at a 'general' > audience, which is pretty close to the same in terms of > limiting the more intimate nature of the content. Betsy Hp: Sure, okay, a general audience. With the mindset that children are dipping their little noses into this world (and it's especially attractive to them) so please don't show anything too shocking. > >>bboyminn: > I agree, from one perspective we have very proper > Victorian boys and girls who are probably aware of sex > in the context of marriage, but probably much more > unaware of sex in the context of 'recreation'. > > Other's have pointed out that Hogwarts and the wizard > world seem very old fashioned, and I think that is > reflected the the students attitude toward proper > behavior. Betsy Hp: Yeah, I don't get that. None of the student body has struck me as particularly Victorian in their mind set. Ginny and Lavander would be seen as rather whorish if this were so (kissing in *public*!?!) and thoughts of marriage would arrive as soon as the OWLs did. Instead of a cultural difference I really think it's a writing choice. Otherwise Ron's remark about Lavander's (sorry) *Ur*anus in what was it, 3rd year, would have been quite shocking, and the couples found in bushes would have been expelled and/or married off in great haste. > >>bboyminn: > Further on the subject of Harry, I would not expect Harry > to be very socially or sexually forward. > Betsy Hp: But he honestly seems a bit sexually stunted. Doesn't notice the pretty girls until they fling themselves at his feet. And even then, he's not so aware they're pretty. (The pretty boys on the other hand... ) Again, I think it's more a writing choice, JKR doesn't do sexual awareness first hand. But the fact is, Harry isn't merely shy. He's downright uninterested. > >>bboyminn: > Draco is another example of someone who, while he grew > up as an only child, has had the confidence that comes > from a position of social rank and priviledge. Draco > doesn't question his desirability. > Betsy Hp: Steve, I am shocked *shocked* that our interpertations of Draco are so different!! Seriously, Draco is a little performer. He's almost always surrounded by a crowd laughing as he clowns. I doubt it has much to do with social rank than with personality. If Draco had been switched at birth with Ron, I'm betting he'd still be working the crowd for a laugh. But I don't know that Draco sees himself as too sexy for his shirt (so sexy it hurts, etc. ). We have a hint of one girlfriend, and this a girl he's been friends with (apparently) from 1st year on. And we've not seen Draco fighting off hoards of people longing to date him. > >>bboyminn: > Draco has an easy confidence that Harry, give his > situation, could never have. Draco is someone who can > go out into the world and companions will seek him out. > He never doubts the sincerity of those companions > because he just assumes the are all money grubbing > and power hungry. His only caution is to make sure that > HE is more money grubbing, power hungry, and > manipulative than they are. Betsy Hp: Gosh, what do you base all that on? Draco seems pretty steadfast in his selection of friends. And I've never noticed him manipulating people to get money or power or what have you. He's just friends with his friends and likes to make those around him laugh. > >>bboyminn: > I also agree that Draco despite his confidence, shows > a great deal of restraint. He can't just marry the > first pretty skirt that catches his eye. He needs to > consider things like rank, wealth, and breeding. > Betsy Hp: Wait, you're not basing this on the fact that Draco didn't *rape* Madame Rosmerta are you? Because that seems to be a bit of leap, IMO. ("Oh, he didn't rape that woman; it must be because he's worried about her rank.") Also, Draco dated (or is dating) Pansy, with whom he's been friends for several years. I don't see what you're basing this idea of a cynical consideration of rank, etc. on exactly. > >>bboyminn: > Harry on the other hand, seems, as you point out, to > be oblivious to the girls around him, and rightly so. > Since he is the famous 'Boy Who Lived', he can't trust > anyone to like him for him rather than his status. Betsy Hp: It's more the obliviousness of not noticing who in his class has nice boobs or nice legs, or is Tonks quite pretty or not so much. I mean, I'm not saying Harry isn't a player and isn't that unrealistic. I'm saying Harry doesn't notice girls much at all. And he certainly doesn't seem to find them physically intriguing. (He notices Ginny's hair, but nothing about her body at all, for example.) Again, I think this is a writing choice and not intended as an insight into Harry. But it does, especially as Harry enters his teenage years, make the story more fairytale and much less realistic. > >>bboyminn: > > As to Slytherin vs Gryffindors in the arena of romance, > I think certainly Slytherins in general have an easy > confidence and comfort in this area. They assume that > they are desirable, and that anyone else who can't see > that is obviously wrong. Betsy Hp: Oh, I don't think Slytherins are *that* comfortable with themselves. (A bit unrealistic to think a whole House is that confident, IMO.) I just think they might be a bit more sensual in the end. A bit more open to the birds and the bees stuff. > >>bboyminn: > Gryffindors on the other hand take a far more noble and > restrained approach; gentlemen to the core. Betsy Hp: Heh. Not with the twins in their ranks. No, the Gryffindor are not very much gentlemen at all. Except for Neville, who is their only link to their chivalrous past (no wonder they're not too fond of him). I'm not sure JKR sets too much store by gentlemen, frankly. Betsy Hp From puduhepa98 at aol.com Thu Feb 1 00:35:43 2007 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:35:43 EST Subject: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164412 >KJ >One of the reasons that I find McGonnagal interesting is because Dumbledore is a compulsive collector of strays. He has Hagrid, a half giant, who would not be accepted in WW society. He has Flitwick, also a half-breed, who's non-human half would not be accepted. We have Snape, who is a Death Eater, and would be hard pressed to find suitable employment outside of Hogwarts, and we have Sybill, who is rather too fond of the cooking sherry. We also have Firenze, who has been thrown out of his herd, and has nowhere else to go. Nikkalmati I just want to point out the ST is not shown as getting into the sherry until she is under pressure from Delores and her job is threatened. I don't think she was drinking before OOP. Its not an original part of her character (unless you think she had been drinking in the Hogs Head). Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 00:43:23 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 00:43:23 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164413 >bboyminn: > Final note; I have always suspect, though of course it > occurs off-page, that at a certain age students are taken > aside and given 'the talk', at which time, amoung many > other things, magical birth control is taught. It seems > reasonable that in a few millennium of magical history, > means of magical birth control would have been invented, > several means. So, this could account for the lack of any > embarassing 'accidents' amoung Hogwarts students. zgirnius: Or perhaps not, explaining certain hurried post-Hogwarts marriages, and the thirteen-year-old father on the Black Family Tree. From va32h at comcast.net Thu Feb 1 00:45:55 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 00:45:55 -0000 Subject: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164414 blitz writes: I agree - the emotionalism is not always a good trait in matters of dire straits. It makes her much more human to the reader, but Dumbledore may see it as a disadvantage. And as I noted before, she isn't very good at politics. I don't think she could officiate an order meeting with someone she didn't particularly like - if she had to deal with ol' Dung and they butted heads, I can see a situation a bit similar to that of Severus and Sirius in OotP. If she was entrusted to very important information, like the existence of Horcruxes, I think that she would act on it somewhat rashly, including wanting to help DD/Harry find them. Dumbledore has said it before: "You are needed at Hogwarts!" And she is - as a liason between HQ and Hogwarts, as a very respected member of the WW, and as someone Harry inherently trusts. Keeping her out of the loop is just the only way to keep her happy and at home. va32h here: I see McGonnagal entirely differently! She is very by-the-book and official, yes with that little bit of emotion peeking through, but ust peeking. McGonnagal is a grown up Hermione, if Hermione had never befriended Ron and Harry. I think if she were told about the horcruxes, far from acting rashly, she would declare that Harry was far too young to hear about them, much less try to find them. If asked to help find them, she would make lists and map out possible locations, approach the whole thing in a rational and orderly fashion. These are not bad qualities in themselves, but confronting the ever- changing face of evil requires a little more spontanaiety than Minerva is likely to have. Why does Percy know that the first years will start out changing matches to needles? Because McGonnagal's lesson plans haven't changed in years. Why does she hesitate to have Dumbledore buried at the school? Because it hasn't been done before. Why is she a registered Animagus? Because that's the rule, how dare you even suggest otherwise, you impertinent reader! Harry is in a think-outside-the-box situation, and McGonnagal is all about the box. That's why I think Dumbledore doesn't confide in her. She'd just be reminding him of why his various plans can't possibly work (and when they do anyway, she'd just say "oh well, only because of x, y, z. But it shouldn't have worked and you know it was a terrible risk Albus!" ) Carol wrote: But she's a cat Animagus, too. Why haven't we heard more about that? va32h here: I think we might. That bit with Bellatrix killing the fox has a sense of foreboding about it. On the ESE McGonnagal theory - I have skimmed it, but it doesn't strike me as a very likely or satisfying one, quite honestly. va32h/Barbara From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Thu Feb 1 00:53:10 2007 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:53:10 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164415 > > Then Geoff said: > > I don't think that proves - or disproves - anything. > > > > I'm sure that on a warm Saturday afternoon or after classes on a > summer > > day, many of the boys would have their shirts off whiling away their > time > > down on the grass by the lake, > > > > Sandy responds: Geoff, while I so hate to disagree with you, there is absolutely no cannon to support such a view and, furthermore, I think there is a little bit of movie contamination here. The kids at Hogwarts wear wizard robes and, based on Snape's Worst Memory, they wear nothing under them but undergarments. When James so unceremoniously yanked Snape in the air upside-down you will recall that it revealed his dingy, gray underpants. It is only in the movies that the kids wear uniforms under their robes. Therefore, if the male students were basquing around the lake bare-chested, they would be doing so in nothing but their underwear. Even in the second task of the TWT the students entered the lake in their robes. This is actually one of the things that irks me about the medium that must not be mentioned. With each subsequent movie the kids spend more and more time in mugglewear and less in wizard's robes. I love the whole concept of the robes, so this really irritates me. In response to Bart's original message, which I have snipped completely. As a mature adult, I take for granted that there is hanky-panky going on at Hogwarts, but I, personally, am glad it is off-page. It would add nothing to the story but wasted page space, and there was altogether too much of that with the endless wasted pages of the Ron/Lavender snogging. I don't need graphic descriptions of kids doing what kids do, and JKR is not too strong with that kind of thing anyway. As someone who is totally disgusted with Dan's decision to do Equus, I am eternally grateful that I don't have to put up with like material in the books. But, I digress from book and cannon... Sandy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Feb 1 01:10:24 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:10:24 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45C13E00.8080000@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164416 Bart wrote: > Hogwarts has students from 10-17. Doesn't ANYBODY have sex? Now, I > am not one of those people who say that ALL teenagers have sex, but > certainly, SOME do. ibchawz responds: > Would this really add anything to the story from a literary > perspective? I don't really care to read the intimate details of > the sex lives of all the characters. Bart: Well, we hear about all the "snogging" going on as if it were a big thing. Unless there are meanings for "snogging" we're not aware of... Bart From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 01:11:10 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 01:11:10 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164417 BetsyHP wrote: > I do think it's... I don't know if odd is the right word, but it does lessen the realism of the Potterverse for me. How many years was it before Ron discovered boys couldn't enter the girls' dorms? You're telling me none of the boys attempted a panty raid at one point or another? Carol responds: Ron's discovery of the girls' staircase being off limits to boys is a memorable comic moment (along with his short-lived reaction to the double standard--girls are expected to be better behaved and more sensible than boys), but to me it's in keeping with his failure to understand his feelings for Hermione for six whole books when they're obvious to everyone else (well, to most readers, to Hermione, and eventually even to Harry). Like most teenage boys, he experiences physical attraction long before he can separate it from love--or, at any rate, a relationship based on mutual respect and affection as well as physical attraction. In this respect, Ron strikes me as a typical teenage boy viewed from a comic perspective. But he's also more prone than Harry to jealousy, or at least, less able to control his jealousy. (Not that I think he deserved to be attacked by a flock of birds, but that's another post.) > Betsy HP: > I will say, also, that it leaves Harry's sexuality somewhat in question for me, or at least a bit ambiguous. I mean, I know JKR means for Harry to be quite straight. But he seemed very bored with actually kissing Cho. (One kiss, and Harry lost all interest in the possibility it seemed.) Harry doesn't develop any sort of crush on any older girls. Veelas do nothing for him. > Instead it's Ron who takes very quick notice of Madam Rosmerta, and who falls all over Fluer, and who is very willing to make out with Lavander until the cows come home even though they don't have all that much in common. Carol responds: That's not the impression I get. Harry spills water all over himself when he sees Cho in GoF and his stomach does flipflops every time he sees her. He never has any such crush on another boy. And in HBP we get the monster in his chest. (I got really tired of that monster, but, fortunately, JKR is better with other story elements than she is with romance.) As for the Veela (and Fleur, of course, is part Veela), Harry at first is just as susceptible as Ron, but just as he can control his jealousy to some degree, keeping it inside rather than revealing it through words and action, he also learns to control his, erm, attraction to the Veelas rather more quickly than Ron and the other boys (or even the men, to judge from the referee). The sensation he feels, a kind of euphoria in which nothing matters except showing off for the Veela, is very similar to the euphoria he feels when Crouch!Moody places him under the Imperius Curse. My feeling is that the two abilities are related--Harry can resist the pull of the Veela because he can resist the Imperius Curse. (Something to do with his scar, maybe?) Maybe Harry is just a bit more mature than Ron (which I hate to say because I like Ron, but he's very much a kid even at seventeen). > BetsyHP: > Also, Harry is fairly quick at spotting the handsome young men (Cedric, Sirius, Lupin, Tom Riddle), while he doesn't seem as able to spot the pretty young women. Is Tonks attractive, for example? And why do we need a Slytherin to point out that Ginny is pretty? (Though partially I wonder if this isn't because JKR doesn't like describing female characters as good looking for political reasons.) Carol: Or we need to know that those young men are handsome for plot reasons. Seriously, I think Harry is so obsessed with Cho for two books that he can't even see any other girl, and by the time he realizes that he likes Ginny, he's seen her so often that he doesn't even think about her looks. Is Tonks attractive? She's an "older woman" with pink or purple hair. Carol, who wouldn't want sex in a kids' book, anyway From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 1 01:47:15 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:47:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) References: Message-ID: <004201c745a2$e7519350$c77e400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164418 Steve: > As to Slytherin vs Gryffindors in the arena of romance, > I think certainly Slytherins in general have an easy > confidence and comfort in this area. They assume that > they are desirable, and that anyone else who can't see > that is obviously wrong. > > Gryffindors on the other hand take a far more noble and > restrained approach; gentlemen to the core. Magpie: *spits water on screen* Sorry, but that's funny. Thanks, but as a woman reading the books I think I'll make my own decisions on who's a "gentleman" or not and I'm not giving Gryffindor any medals as a house for this one. (And anyway, these days someone calling themselves a "gentleman" is often a jerk, unfortunately.) But then I'm a Scarlet Woman good for physical experience to make boys worthy of their true love.;-) In terms of judging the houses against each other, I admit I, like Betsy, found the Slytherin train scene to give the impression that the house of water/emotion were more into some of these sensual pleasures (having more time not having to save the world, perhaps). It fits the passionate natures of the Blacks and Slughorn's pleasure-seeking in HBP as well. But in terms of how individuals treat other individuals of the opposite sex, well, that's harder to tell. You've judged Draco as being fine with people just after his power while Harry chooses a girl in his "safe" circle, but the reality is that Draco and Harry are pretty much both dating girls they've been close to for a long time. (Draco's perhaps closer to his girlfriend for longer--Pansy's introduced in first year and is connected to him by PoA. They seem to be close friends on their own before dating, unlike Harry and Ginny) They both have a small group of long-term friends. Draco's more aggressively social than Harry--this could partially be having a confidence Harry lacks (though Harry has a different kind of confidence Draco lacks), but I think it's just personality. He does consider social networking based on money and class part of the game, but he also works really hard for attention and reactions from other kids and friends. Stood side by side with a strange boy in a robe shop, Draco starts talking to him. In the end both characters have stories that depend on them having a set group of people who care about them, imo. Sandy: Sandy responds: Geoff, while I so hate to disagree with you, there is absolutely no cannon to support such a view and, furthermore, I think there is a little bit of movie contamination here. The kids at Hogwarts wear wizard robes and, based on Snape's Worst Memory, they wear nothing under them but undergarments. When James so unceremoniously yanked Snape in the air upside-down you will recall that it revealed his dingy, gray underpants. It is only in the movies that the kids wear uniforms under their robes Magpie: Clothing is one of the places Rowling is at her least consistent, however. If they're wearing robes with nothing underneath, how is Ron's shirt untucked? Where do they wear sweaters? I know there's other areas where it's unclear or clothing comes and goes along with Wizard awareness of how Muggles dress. Regardless, I don't think the tattoo comment is meant to be any signal that Harry and Ginny have or haven't done anything. Hermione could have easily made the same joke with no one batting an eye. -m (seeing now that Betsy has answered this already saying much the same things) From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Feb 1 01:57:16 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:57:16 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45C148FC.5090308@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164419 Steve wrote: > First, Bart, what happens on-the-page and what happens > off-the-page are entirely different things. If you want > to find out what happens 'off-page' just read Fan Fiction > and you will discover that students are snogging and > shagging all over the place in every imaginable > combination and with every imaginable predilection for > assorted fetishes. Though the Astronomy Tower seems to > be everyone's favorite, and Draco usually has a tendency > toward BDSM. Bart: The fan fiction is one of the reasons I'm glad the series is going to end in Book 7. Marion Zimmer Bradley made the mistake of allowing and even encouraging fan fiction for her "Darkover" series. It worked out fine. That is, until she had a novel which some fan complained was too close to that fan's stories. Result: The novel never got published, and she withdrew all permission for fan fiction. As far as Draco's tendencies, well he DID Imperius Rosie. Steve: > As far as 'on-page' consider most TV sit-coms, they > usually include teenage kids, why don't they all play > out like a cheap porn movies? Now modern sit-coms are > more likely to tackle certain issues of a sexual nature > but they do so with an extremely delicate hand. There > are 'Standards and Practices' censors who keep tight > control on such matters. Bart: They may not, but a lot of their friends do. And there are all sorts of euphemisms used ("Jane plays around, but I don't"). I did start off by saying that not all teenagers have sex; just some. Bart From kaleeyj at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 02:01:02 2007 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 02:01:02 -0000 Subject: Callous celebrations In-Reply-To: <35B410BE-B17A-11DB-8DF2-0050E4FA3637@labyrinth.net.au> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164420 I'll bite! Carol: > On Thursday, February 1, 2007, at 04:12 am, justcarol67 wrote: > > > In fact, the celebrations always seemed to me to be > > callous if not cold-hearted. A popular young witch and wizard have > > just died, and people are shooting off the WW equivalent of > > fireworks? Jocelyn: > At the end of each World War there was dancing in the streets, and > presumably more localised conflicts have the same reaction to the > overthrow of tyrants, death of claimants to the throne etc... > > Only those who have lost someone in the immediate past would not be > celebrating. I think that is reasonable. For most of the wizarding > world, freedom from fear has come at last! No more dark marks in > the sky. No more waiting for the door to be blasted in in the > night. Of course they celebrate! > > Many have died by this point, not just the Potters. The Potters are > expected to be the last to die - and THAT is cause for rejoicing. > (At least it is unless you personally knew and loved the Potters.) Blitz now: Let's add some fat to the fire! I was arguing both points to myself and I just had to go online one moe time tonight and argue a bit. Jocelyn, do you know the name of the last soldier killed in WWII? What about the last person from WWI? I'm guessing not. However, notice in the first book that a /lot/ of people seem to know the Potters by name. Now I will concede that the WW is a small community. And Godric's Hollow could be a suburb right near London; we don't know. But in the streets, pople are saying "The Potters, Lily and James... and their son, Harry." I find that interesting. Potter is a relatively common name in Britian, yes? Not one that would stick in your mind if someone mentioned to you a few nmonths ago, "Oh I met the cutest couple, Lily and James Potter on the train today." And granted the Daily Prophet people can jump on a story quick;ly - they're all over Ron and Harry's flying car incident by the time they get to Hogwarts. But they wouldn't want to report the news that quickly, with so many unanswered questions, namely, what stopped LV. So I don't think people are getting all their information from a newspaper. These people know the Potters well enough to know their names, and their toddler son. Or do they? Vernon Dursley hears these comments. He doesn't notice the speaker. Was this at the same time as the bump into Flitwick? (I don't have my books, but I think it may have been.) JKR didn't note the the voices talking about the Potters were squeaky. So we can probably assume that this is a random stranger, and not someone who knew the Potters personally. (Flitwick, obviously, would have known them and quite possibly even their son's name.) So a random stranger knows Lily and James Potter, and their son, Harry. In the middle of London. I see that as fishy. I think that the Potters may have been at least somewhat famous *before* the attack on Godric's Hollow. Something to make the Potter name relatively well known - minor celebrity status, possibly. (No idea what, though James campaigning against LV, or Lily becoming a very accredited Potioneer come to mind first - I like the Lily one - give Snape another reason to not stand him.) Would you celebrate if, say, Johnny Depp died a tragic death that was to be the last attack by the Taliban (say the building collapsed on all of them when they were destroying it). What if Frodo's uncle died while helping Frodo bring down Sauron? (Imagine him going along and Gollum pulling him into the pit with him.) Would the entire hobbit race be celebrating? Not even a flag at half mast? Nothing? How about a member of the Rockefeller family dying in the end of an Evil Overlord's reign? Or Obi-Wan Kenobi dying and taking Darth adfer with him? I would expect, especially in a relatively small WW, that there would be some sort of observance. So I'm with Carol here. But then: You are right - there are major celebrations after the end of a war, and those who know the victims personally celebrate a bit hollow-heartedly for obvious reasons. And Carol mentioned that Sirius' reaction was more accurate and less unfeeling (I use it for lack of a better word) that the rest of the WW. Which I agree - because he was their closest friend. /And/ he knew what really happened. /And/ Black isn't the most look-before-you-leap kind of guy - he acts rashly. I think that if the Potters are a bit famous, then yes, the celebrations are a bit callous. But surely more than just their old teachers and their best friends cared about the Potters? And finally: This is one point that I disagree with JKR on. (Not that I've ever had the chance to discuss it with her, but anyway.) She claims that the first book is a very dark book (when someone mentions how each book takes a darker tone than the last) - it starts out with a double murder, and a boy being orphaned. I say this: I never felt that PS was a dark book - and I have to reread the graveyard scene in GoF to even get a hint that it was. James and Lily are just faceless names in PS, and the readers doesn't feel anything except a bit of mystery about it. until I see those two characters more fully fleshed out, I'll feel worse about Sirisu getting thrown in Azkaban without a trial than Lily and James dying. So really, as a reader putting myself in with Wizarding community as one of them, I would be with Jocelyn on this one, full on. As a straight reader, not reading between the lines, I still agree with you. But as a HP Sleuth (and a nitpicker who is in line to become a Continuity Eagle with the medium-that-must-not-be-named), I have to say that I think Carol is more on target with this one. There should be a bit of mourning, if they are *that* well known. ~blitz for what it's worth, it ain't worth much! From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 1 02:14:41 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 21:14:41 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape (was Would Harry forgiving ) References: Message-ID: <006901c745a6$bc324fd0$c77e400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164421 Pippin: > This is *exactly* the cultural difference I am talking about. In > "The Queen" Elizabeth just cannot fathom why it's so important to > everyone that she speak openly about the loss of Diana. To her > it seemed that it would be completely inappropriate and self-serving > to make a display of her grief. And the result was that she was > perceived as being cold and manipulative. I can see Dumbledore in > the same place, hesitating between the values he was brought up with, > which have served him well for 150 years, and his sympathy > for Harry. Magpie: Personally I have no problem with Dumbledore not saying "I'm sorry for your loss," but I don't know where you're getting "cold" from this scene. Dumbledore's talking about feelings all over the place--at one point he even suggests that Harry thinks he will "bleed to death" from the "pain" of his loss of Sirius (so emotional he's mixing metaphors). He's not grieving for anyone, but he is talking about Harry's loss and his warm and fuzzy feelings for Harry. So any cultural difference about showing feelings (and I tend to side more with the Queen when it comes to public displays of emotion) don't really apply to the scene. I think Dumbledore was actually giving in this scene *exactly* the kind of stuff people were demanding of the Queen. "Show us you care!" the headline said--Dumbledore is Showing He Cares! >> >> > Magpie: >> > And for some reason felt the need to remind us of the dangers of >> too much attention here, even though nobody in the room that we > can see is suffering from it (and in fact it seems like everyone he's > talking about in the scene suffered from the opposite). > > Pippin: > Ah. But for Dumbledore the danger was always there, just as the > danger of Voldemort was always there even when Harry wasn't aware > of it. Why do you think Dumbledore kept the known half of the > prophecy such a secret? Magpie: The danger's still there right now so he has to remind Harry that he wasn't a pampered Prince when he got to Hogwarts? So what I'm getting here is that Dumbledore really has issues with kids being pampered--so much so that he does see that as a plus with the Dursleys that he's pleased about. -m From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 02:39:14 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 02:39:14 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164422 > >>Carol: > Ron's discovery of the girls' staircase being off limits to boys is > a memorable comic moment... Betsy Hp: Oh, I totally agree that the comedy of this moment was great. But it suggests that either Ron walks around with a giant bag over his head and cotton in his ears, or the Gryffindor boys (of any class present when either Ron or his brothers attended Hogwarts) have never considered raiding the girls' dorm. Which is not very realistic, IMO. (Nor is the fact that the girls haven't raided the boys dorm.) I'm not *demanding* that level of realism, of course (especially since I don't think it'd fit with JKR's writing style). It'd completely change the makeup of the books, but it does keep the series labeled as "childrens' books" in my mind. > >>Betsy HP: > > I will say, also, that it leaves Harry's sexuality somewhat in > > question for me, or at least a bit ambiguous. I mean, I know JKR > > means for Harry to be quite straight. But he seemed very bored > > with actually kissing Cho. (One kiss, and Harry lost all > > interest in the possibility it seemed.) Harry doesn't develop > > any sort of crush on any older girls. Veelas do nothing for him. > > > >>Carol: > That's not the impression I get. Harry spills water all over himself > when he sees Cho in GoF and his stomach does flipflops every time he > sees her. Betsy Hp: Absolutely. And I think JKR captured that sort of first crush anxiety very well. But it's *after* Cho actually kisses him that Harry pulls away. He doesn't seem all that impressed with his first attempt, and doesn't seem at all interested in trying again. Which is perfectly fine, of course. But it does sort of suggest that Harry isn't all that excited about sex (kissing, etc.) yet. > >>Carol: > He never has any such crush on another boy. > Betsy Hp: Oh, of course not! I'm not suggesting JKR's overtly stating or even insinuating that Harry is gay. It's more something I chuckle over, frankly. We're just very quickly told about all the pretty boys. Pretty girls? Not so much. And since it's generally through Harry's point of view that we learn about the good looking guys, and it's Harry's point of view that's *not* noticing the good looking girls, it can seem a bit suggestive at times. > >>Carol: > > As for the Veela (and Fleur, of course, is part Veela), > Harry at first is just as susceptible as Ron... Betsy Hp: Oops, you're right. Harry does slip under the Veela's sway for a while there. > >>Carol: > Maybe Harry is just a bit more mature than Ron (which I hate to say > because I like Ron, but he's very much a kid even at seventeen). Betsy Hp: That's probably what JKR is going for, yes. Personally I don't like the idea that an interest in sex is a mark of the immature but there you are. And of course, Ron's interest is always couched in comic terms. Whereas Harry is always more interested in personality than looks, bless him. (Um, unless of course it's a guy. ) > >>Carol: > Or we need to know that those young men are handsome for plot > reasons. Betsy Hp: That Tom Riddle is so very, very pretty is important, but there's no reason to suggest Tonks might be attractive? > >>Carol: > Seriously, I think Harry is so obsessed with Cho for two books that > he can't even see any other girl, and by the time he realizes that > he likes Ginny, he's seen her so often that he doesn't even think > about her looks. Betsy Hp: Which *so* doesn't work for me. If Harry is suddenly attracted to Ginny, he should notice something physically attractive about her, something he's not noticed before. Magic of puberty, etc. > >>Carol: > Is Tonks attractive? She's an "older woman" with pink or purple > hair. Betsy Hp: Yup. Meanwhile Tom Riddle is "more handsome then ever" when he steals the Hufflepuff cup. Why can't we get an idea of Tonks being attractive? > Carol, who wouldn't want sex in a kids' book, anyway Betsy Hp: Me neither. But it does keep them as kids' books, and therefore not terribly realistic. Especially as we start dealing with teenagers. Betsy Hp Betsy Hp From dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 02:32:41 2007 From: dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com (dragonkeeper) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:32:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Callous celebrations In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <358306.52639.qm@web53302.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164423 When the First Gulf War ended, went launched our flares in celebration to the end of the conflict, but we never lose sight of our comrades who died also. A celebration will last for a few hours, but the losses from a conflict will last for a long long time and I'm sure J.K.Rowlings characters reflect this attitude. You tend to remember the losses more than the celebration. dragonkeeper From drednort at alphalink.com.au Thu Feb 1 02:43:23 2007 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 13:43:23 +1100 Subject: ADMIN: Those strange messages In-Reply-To: <006901c745a6$bc324fd0$c77e400c@Spot> Message-ID: <45C1EE7B.79.39C050D@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 164424 Greetings from Hexquarters! At least some people have noticed some rather odd messages appearing on HPForGrownups recently - messages with a particular subject heading that reads: HOT IRANIAN PERSIAN SEX PICS AND STORIES These appear to come from a member of this group. They almost certainly DO NOT come from a member of this group, and certainly not from the member who's name appears on them. Messages like these do circulate the web. These messages are nearly always the product of one of a number of e-mail viruses that are circulating around the internet at any time, or the product of a deliberate attempt to hijack a persons identity and use it to post. Sometimes such messages can contain viruses. These current e-mails do not appear to carry a viral payload and so do not appear to pose a threat to listmembers, beyond the fact that they are very annoying, but some general advice should still be followed. E-mail viruses reproduce themselves by e-mail. The way they typically work is that they raid the address book of the e-mail program of an infected computer and send e-mails that look like they come from one of the addresses in that address book to other addresses in that address book. This means that they appear to come from someone who almost certainly did not send them and has no control over the fact they have been sent. But because that address may be that of a member of this list, yahoogroups allows the message to get onto the list, thinking it must be a message from the person whose name appears on it. This list is set up to strip off any attachments to e-mails, so the virus never reaches this list and you cannot become infected by the messages on this list for that reason. They are annoying, but they are not dangerous. However, there are plenty of other ways that such a message could infect you - the virus could send itself as if it came from the HPForGrownups at yahoogroups.com address if that is in the address book of an infected computer, for example, and it could be sent to you from anyone who has your address in their address book. So it is very important that all users of Windows based computers have up to date anti-virus software installed on their computer. While viruses can be written for non-Windows computers, they are much rarer, so this is most important for Windows users. There are a wide range of anti-virus products available and it is not our place to suggest which one you should use. But there is an anti-virus program called AVG which is available free to home users at: http://free.grisoft.com/doc/1 that is certainly worth looking at if you have no other protection. For now, the most important things to note are: (1) The person whose name appears on these e-mails as the sender is not responsible for what is occurring - their identity has been hijacked in some way. (2) It is unlikely these messages pose any threat to any person on the list beyond their annoyance value, which is considerable, but people can take precautions if they are worried. Shaun AKA Crikey Elf For the List Elves From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 02:49:55 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 02:49:55 -0000 Subject: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164425 KJ wrote: > >One of the reasons that I find McGonnagal interesting is because Dumbledore is a compulsive collector of strays. He has Hagrid, a half giant, who would not be accepted in WW society. He has Flitwick, also a half-breed, who's non-human half would not be accepted. We have Snape, who is a Death Eater, and would be hard pressed to find suitable employment outside of Hogwarts, and we have Sybill, who is rather too fond of the cooking sherry. We also have Firenze, who has been thrown out of his herd, and has nowhere else to go. > Nikkalmati responded: > I just want to point out the ST is not shown as getting into the sherry until she is under pressure from Delores and her job is threatened. I don't think she was drinking before OOP. Its not an original part of her character (unless you think she had been drinking in the Hogs Head). Carol adds: As for Snape, if it were widely known that he had been a DE, he surely wouldn't have been teaching at Hogwarts. The parents would have written letters of complaint, just as Lupin said they would do about him if it were known that he was a werewolf. If the kids knew, the rumors about him would be much worse than "he favors the Slytherins" or "he wants the DADA job." Certainly, if Rita Skeeter had known, she would have listed him among DD's unwise hiring chioces (a werewolf, a half-giant, a paranoid Auror). She wasn't likely to pass up a juicy tidbit like that. Sirius Black didn't know, and he was Snape's enemy and an Order member before his arrest. Apparently, his name wasn't published along with those who pled the Imperius Curse. The charges against him were dropped entirely. And Dumbledore would want to protect the identity of his spy and would not want the reason the charges were dropped to be publicized. The fewer people who knew that Snape was or had been a Death Eater, or was spying for DD at great personal risk, the better. Once he showed his Dark Mark to Fudge, he probably ruined any career prospects he might have had at the MoM or St. Mungo's if he chose to leave Hogwarts, but I don't think Fudge knew until that moment that Snape had been a DE. Nor, it seems, did Minerva mcGonagall or Sirius Black. Carol, who agrees that DD was protecting Snape, but not from the Wizarding public From inishumina at yahoo.co.uk Thu Feb 1 02:05:18 2007 From: inishumina at yahoo.co.uk (inishumina) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 02:05:18 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: <004201c745a2$e7519350$c77e400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164426 inishumina: I in part agree with both Steve and Magpie, calling someone a gentleman is rare these days and from what I have read there seems to be more in Gryffindor than Slytherin, though Slytherin are much more confident about themselves in this matter. We have to also remember they are just school kids and that's just how they act around the opposite sex at that age. From elfundeb at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 03:13:41 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:13:41 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: References: <80f25c3a0701302137v5012e204wb3020ef591f6a3b0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <80f25c3a0701311913h1aeb8aabp21ae4109d6f58ce7@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164427 blitz: If she was entrusted to very important information, like the existence of Horcruxes, I think that she would act on it somewhat rashly, including wanting to help DD/Harry find them. Debbie: Are you saying that other Order members, say Sirius, for example, would *not* act rashly on important information? va32h: think if she were told about the horcruxes, far from acting rashly, she would declare that Harry was far too young to hear about them, much less try to find them. If asked to help find them, she would make lists and map out possible locations, approach the whole thing in a rational and orderly fashion. These are not bad qualities in themselves, but confronting the ever- changing face of evil requires a little more spontanaiety than Minerva is likely to have. Debbie: Except that McGonagall still doesn't have these qualities, yet she is now in the Order. This leads me to believe that the issue is one of trust, not her combat skills. Carol chimes in: I think her usually concealed softness or emotionalism is the reason that DD doesn't trust her with every detail of his anti-Voldemort plan, that and her already heavy workload and his need-to-know policy. Debbie: If that's the case, it's exactly the issue that frustrates me. For McGonagall to be excluded from the Order because of *softness* or *emotionalism* -- both characteristically feminine traits -- says to me that fighting Voldemort is a man's job, and McGonagall needn't bother herself over it. Besides, Dumbledore hasn't exactly shown a knack for weeding out potential Order members who might be security risks. What about Hagrid? Talk about security leaks! And Sirius? His bad judgment could also be phrased as softness or emotionalism, but Dumbledore never tried to keep him out of the Order. And it's not just that McGonagall tends to keep her own counsel; that would have excluded Lupin as well. In any event, it's not that Dumbledore doesn't trust her with every detail of his plan; nobody has all the details, as far as I know. But if McGonagall was not in the Order, he must not have trusted her with *any* details. This is why I tried to come up with a scenario in which Dumbledore had reason to distrust her loyalty. And based on the information we've been given, the only thing that seems to fit is a prior relationship with Riddle, that she failed to disclose to Dumbledore. Carol again: She doesn't need to know about the blood protection, for example, because she's not involved. McGonagall is quite competent as a teacher, disciplinarian, HoH, and assistant headmistress, but that's a heavy workload for a woman of her age, "sprightly" or not, witch or not. He only uses her, at least until OoP, for matters directly related to Hogwarts and its students, and even there it's not clear what she does for the Order during the summer holidays. something not too strenuous, probably, involving a disguise as a Muggle. Debbie: Until OOP, I don't think she did *anything* for the Order. Based on her absence from Moody's photograph, she was not recruited until the Order was reconvened at the end of GoF. Prior to that, Dumbledore relied on her in matters directly related to Hogwarts because that was her job as Deputy Headmistress -- and we don't even know whether Dumbledore appointed her to that position or if the Board of Governors did it. Carol: But she's a cat Animagus, too. Why haven't we heard more about that? Debbie: Much as I'd like to see McGonagall's cat animagus take on a real role in the series, I'm afraid it might just be little more than window dressing, like the movable staircases at Hogwarts. The only real purpose it served was to introduce the concept early on -- like Sirius, this took place in PS/SS ch. 1 -- and thereby lay a foundation for the revelations in PoA. blitz: I'm just curious as to what she did with those ten years. I don't think it has anything major to do with the story line - perhaps she got married, or even widowed before her husband and she could start a family? Debbie: Oh, I know -- maybe she married Riddle! Debbie who really wants to know why Flitwick isn't in the Order, since he's a duelling champion and all that, and ready to whip up a suitable backstory involving irrational wizarding fears of part-goblin rebellions [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From entangledhere at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 03:23:12 2007 From: entangledhere at yahoo.com (Sunny) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:23:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) Message-ID: <20070201032312.16076.qmail@web51408.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164428 As I'm new to this forum, I'm just going to jump in! There seems to be multiple conversations going on, but I shall only start with one. I agree with Betsy Hp - Jo is NOT a romance writer. This is not her strength. She doesn't do a fabulous job of explaining how Harry feels around girls, etc. I'm not saying she's a terrible author, of course, because she's fabulous, but writing interaction with the opposite sex just isn't her forte. I know this, because I'm a writer, and it IS my forte, hehe. As for why there is no sex at Hogwarts, I agree that we probably just don't see it, if there is. I grew up in a world where literally everyone was having sex with random people in high school, but I never did. Perhaps Harry is just one of those people who can't find the right person. (No, Ginny is not the right person.) Also, and this is the BIG REASON: Harry has FAR too much on his mind to be thinking about sex! He's hunting the world's darkest wizard and running around looking for Horcruxes and witnessing murders and all sorts of other things. I think that girls just end up in the back of his mind because his life is just too traumatic for it right now. These are my opinions. And I love this group. Lots of fun! *Sunny Christian* We are the music makers. We are the dreamers of the dreams. http://www.sunnychristian.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 03:47:11 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 03:47:11 -0000 Subject: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0701311913h1aeb8aabp21ae4109d6f58ce7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164429 Debbie wrote: > who really wants to know why Flitwick isn't in the Order, since he's a duelling champion and all that, and ready to whip up a suitable backstory involving irrational wizarding fears of part-goblin rebellions Carol responds: First, my apologies for snipping everything but your sig line (it happens to me all the time :-P!). I know I'm going to be jumped on for this, but I still think that the rumor about Flitwick being a duelling champion was a joke circulated by the students. We don't hear any more about it; he either faints at the prospect of a real battle or is knocked out and sent to the hospital wing (with a bruise on his forehead from a spell that knock you backwards?) from a Stunning spell and remains there for the whole battle instead of returning after a simple Ennervate from Madam Pomfrey. He's sent zooming across a classroom by his students' summoning and Banishing Charms; McGonagall sends him as a messenger to Snape instead of using those duelling skills against the DEs. Even Lockhart, who needs a duelling partner, chooses Snape (whose claim to know "a teeny bit" about duelling is probably deliberate minimizing on Lockhart's part. I can't imagine Snape using that phrase, especially with regard to his considerable skills in that area). As for Flitwick not being a member of the Order, maybe he wasn't a member of the original Order, but neither was McGonagall (unless one of them took the photograph). But I think he was with McGonagall, Tonks, Lupin et al. on the night the DEs invaded Hogwarts precisely because he *is* an Order member. (Snape, also an Order member, wasn't there because DD didn't want him to be. I'm quite sure that he didn't want Snape fighting for the Order because he'd blow his cover.) But Flitwick was them, and not, I think, because he was a teacher. We don't see Professor Sprout, the other HoH there, and surely she would be if it were the teachers, not the Order members, who are guarding Hogwarts while Dumbledore is away. Carol, who thought it was Dedalus Diggle, not Flitwick as suggested in another recent post, who bumped into Vernon Dursley on the day after GH From va32h at comcast.net Thu Feb 1 03:53:24 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 03:53:24 -0000 Subject: Callous celebrations In-Reply-To: <358306.52639.qm@web53302.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164430 You know I thought that this subject line would refer to something entirely different! While pondering the end of the series, I looked back at how much, well, *fun* the books have generated. Release parties, costumes, games, seminars, etc. I remember the morning after the HBP was released, feeling a little strange...my daughter and I attended a midnight party in costume. She was Hermione, and I was Hermione's mother (in dentist gear). We won third place in the costume contest, by the way, losing only to an adorable Dobby, complete with tea-cozy, and a resplendent Nearly Headless Nick. Anyway, the party had been tremendous fun, and everyone there was extremely excited...until about twenty minutes after the books had been handed out and those of us who read the chapter titles knew what must be coming. It was as if a cloud had settled over us, and we all trudged out to our cars looking grumpy and tired. The next morning, it all seemed..well, unseemly! The ending of HBP was disconcerting and depressing, my daughter was in tears by mid- afternoon, and none of this gelled with the fun party atmosphere we had enjoyed the night before. The good news is - I think this bodes well for Harry. If Harry dies, all those Aunt Marge balloons and sticker books will be very inappropriate. And how can there be a party for the night we all learn that Harry dies in the end? *That* would be a callous celebration! va32h From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Feb 1 04:37:07 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 04:37:07 -0000 Subject: Christian Forgiveness and Snape (was Would Harry forgiving ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164431 Magpie: > If this scene was supposed to make me feel impressed by > Dumbledore's caring about Harry, it failed (for me and for many > other people). > Alla: > Yes, yes, yes. Sometimes I am thinking whether JKR truly meant for > us to be impressed by Dumbledore's single tear at the end of his > speech, sigh, or just laugh at it. Because when I read it I either > want to laugh or slap him. But I am thinking that was meant to be > sentimental moment indeed. Nah, felt flat for me as well, > **really** flat. Jen: I've been rethinking my intepretation of the speech, that its importance can be understood by Dumbledore's remark: 'Because you are not nearly as angry with me as you ought to be.' Dumbledore speaks more plainly to Harry than ever before, bringing to light many things that have hurt Harry during the year and over the course of his life. And as he explains his own role in the events of the year as well as historical matters such as the blood charm, Dursleys and the prophecy, Dumbledore offers rationalizations and justifications for his choices. IOW, he is telling Harry not what he feels in his heart but an almost Pensieve-like recollection of how the events occurred and how he made the choices he did at each juncture. The conclusion of the talk is actually the moment in HBP when Harry, armed with both the historical facts from the previous year and the speculative ones about the Horcruxes, makes his own final choice: 'I'd want him finished, and I'd want to be the one to do it'. I see a place for the tear in this intepretation that doesn't work as well when viewing the speech as Dumbledore's big remorse or apology speech. One tear seems so inadequate after everything he's told Harry, everthing he's done *to* Harry. And the most significant thing of all, something barely even touched on, is that Harry doesn't blame him or tell him he's a heinous person and walk away. Harry listens to him and by listening, allows Dumbledore to finally confess what he has done. When Harry chooses to stay with him even afer hearing how Dumbledore contributed to his suffering, Harry is offering an absolution of sorts. Then Dumbledore speaks at the end 'hesitantly', and brings up the absurd point about not offering Harry a prefect badge which is so trivial next to what they've been discussing. In that moment, Dumbledore strikes me as a man who knows there's nothing adequate he can say for what has just occurred, that *he* has just been offered mercy by the one person he desperately hoped would give him a second chance. Jen From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 04:39:06 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 04:39:06 -0000 Subject: Flitwick, Duelling Champ? WAS Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164432 > Carol responds: > I know I'm going to be jumped on for this, but I still think that the > rumor about Flitwick being a duelling champion was a joke circulated > by the students. zgirnius: I've always thought it was true. And very funny that it therefore inspired Lockhart to enlist Snape, merely the Potions Master and *snicker* an inexpert duellist, as his assistant instead. Flitwick would have been very nice and friendly about the whole thing, I am sure. Snape...well, we saw how he was. (Love that scene...) Carol: > We don't hear any more about it; he either faints at > the prospect of a real battle or is knocked out and sent to the > hospital wing (with a bruise on his forehead from a spell that knock > you backwards?) from a Stunning spell zgirnius: There's a simple solution here, which you seem to be overlooking. If he was struck by a Stunning Spell from behind, from a person he trusted, his reflexes and experience would be irrelevant. It would also explain why the bruise is on his forehead - Snape's spell did knock him back (away from Snape) so that he fell forwards. Carol: > McGonagall sends him as a messenger to > Snape instead of using those duelling skills against the DEs. zgirnius: Aha! ESE!Minerva strikes again, removin gthe most[otent weapon on her side in a crisis!! (Just kidding. This is a good point. Unless she thought Snape needed to know about the Death Eaters? Or, perhaps Flitwick is getting on in years and she's worried about his health?) Carol: > Even > Lockhart, who needs a duelling partner, chooses Snape (whose claim to > know "a teeny bit" about duelling is probably deliberate minimizing on > Lockhart's part. I can't imagine Snape using that phrase, especially > with regard to his considerable skills in that area). zgirnius: I think Lockhart did not want a skilled partner. He knows he's a fake, and he wants to make himself look good. And while 'teeny' is not a word I picture Snape using, I could see him claiming to have a 'passing familiarity' with duelling, or some such, when asked, rather than stating that he's very good. He's not been very open about his (considerable) talents in several areas of magic. Lockhart, of course, would probably imagine that such a statement by Snape is an overestimate of his capabilities, because Lockhart himself is quite boastful. From kjones at telus.net Thu Feb 1 05:48:27 2007 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 21:48:27 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45C17F2B.8030500@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164433 puduhepa98 at aol.com wrote: >> KJ >> One of the reasons that I find McGonnagal interesting is because > Dumbledore is a compulsive collector of strays. He has Hagrid, a half > giant, who would not be accepted in WW society. He has Flitwick, also a > half-breed, who's non-human half would not be accepted. We have Snape, > who is a Death Eater, and would be hard pressed to find suitable > employment outside of Hogwarts, and we have Sybill, who is rather too > fond of the cooking sherry. We also have Firenze, who has been thrown > out of his herd, and has nowhere else to go. > > Nikkalmati > I just want to point out the ST is not shown as getting into the sherry > until she is under pressure from Delores and her job is threatened. I don't > think she was drinking before OOP. Its not an original part of her character > (unless you think she had been drinking in the Hogs Head). > > Nikkalmati KJ writes: We don't see that much of Sybill until OotP, but I think that the sherry has been around for a long time. It might be part of the reason that her character seems so vague all the time. In HBP she is explaining to Harry that she had never heard a voice in the RoR "in all her years of hiding-of using the room." So, I took it to mean that she has been hiding her sherry bottles since she got to Hogwarts. KJ From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 07:09:28 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:09:28 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164434 > bboyminn: > > Gryffindors on the other hand take a far more noble and > restrained approach; gentlemen to the core. > Neri: I'd just like to point out that arguably the hottest canon detail regarding Hogwarts nighttime activities comes from two Gryffindors: Arthur and Molly. According to Molly (GoF 13) they were caught out of their dormitories at 4 AM by the previous caretaker, Apollyon Pringle. Molly claimed it was just a night stroll, but I must point out that even if they sneaked out of the Gryffindor Tower at midnight, it must have been a pretty long stroll. Of course, it is possible that Arthur remained a gentelman throughout. Neri From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 08:34:58 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 08:34:58 -0000 Subject: Flitwick, Duelling Champ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164435 --- "zgirnius" wrote: > > > > Carol responds: > > I know I'm going to be jumped on for this, but I > > still think that the rumor about Flitwick being a > > duelling champion was a joke circulated by the > > students. > > zgirnius: > I've always thought it was true. And very funny that > it therefore inspired Lockhart to enlist Snape,... bboyminn: Once small point I would like to make with regard to Flitwick being a dueling champion. I assume this refers to controlled competative dueling, not bar room brawling. Competative Dueling is a very formal contained controlled action. Not at all like fighting in combat or battle. One can be good within the formal confines of competition, but not be good in dynamic uncontrolled situations. For example, just because you are good at competative tournement fensing, doesn't mean you would be good in a real sword fight against a combat trained swordsman. Also, note that the chance of dying in competition is very slim. Chances in a real sword fight or wand combat is much higher, and that risk of death is enough to put anyone off their game. As to the specific event involving Snape and Flitwick, I suspect Flitwick was caught off guard. He went to Snape for help, his mind was on the fact that the school had been invaded. I'm sure that last thing he thought was that Snape would attack him. It seems very understandable under the circumstances. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu Feb 1 11:16:37 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 11:16:37 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: <7132811.1170261213218.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164436 Bart: > Hogwarts has students from 10-17. Doesn't ANYBODY have sex? *(snip)* > Don't tell me that Draco has become a gentleman! Ceridwen: I think the students do have sex, or at least try to find someplace where they can. That's why Filch and Snape, and possibly others, patrol the corridors at night. Not to catch Harry Potter trying to break into the library! Then, there's Snape blasting bushes and calling out couples at the Yule Ball... (There was a cute deleted scene in TMTMNBN#4 that addressed this. Loved it, don't know why the extended version didn't incorporate deleted scenes like LOTR did. *grouse*) ...I doubt they were studying for exams in the bushes. We don't see it normally because Harry doesn't notice, or he doesn't care. He might even feel slightly uncomfortable about it. It's possible JKR just doesn't show his thoughts on it, if he even has any, because she can't show what he thinks about everything, and tje sex lives of Hogwarts students won't move the plot along. The books would be full sets of encyclopedias if she did. For Draco, hm. Good point about Rosmerta making the men a bit antsy. But, he's got a mission this year, his mind is focused on this mission even before school starts. He's elated at first: he's being seen as a Real Adult. By spring, he's falling apart. I don't think his mind was anywhere near Rosmerta beyond her usefulness. Also, Draco didn't go to Hogsmeade Weekend before Christmas. He was in detention. I think someone else Imperio'd Rosmerta on Draco's behalf, that infamous 'better help than Crabbe and Goyle' mentioned to Snape at Christmas. Draco's keeping his distance from the mechanics of the mission. He isn't even present when the first attempt is set in motion. He may never have seen Rosmerta under Imperius. His job is to keep a low profile and complete the mission. Ceridwen, who is glad to see a cute question like this. :D From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Feb 1 13:09:04 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 13:09:04 -0000 Subject: We have a release date Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164437 Yes, it is officially confirmed. "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" will be released July 21st 2007 (meaning only a week after the fifth movie). There's a news on JKR's website: (Im a bit miffed, that she didn't put it behind the locked doort like last time, but oh well). ;-) Hickengruendler, feeling the excitement rise again From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Feb 1 13:56:24 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 13:56:24 -0000 Subject: We have a release date In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164438 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: > > Yes, it is officially confirmed. "Harry Potter and the Deathly > Hallows" will be released July 21st 2007 (meaning only a week after > the fifth movie). There's a news on JKR's website: (Im a bit miffed, > that she didn't put it behind the locked doort like last time, but oh > well). ;-) Geoff: It's also on BBC Ceefax news as well. So, since it isn't 07/07/07, it rather torpedoes one of the favourites of the "Sevens" conspiracy theorists... :-) From chnc1024 at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 1 14:16:03 2007 From: chnc1024 at bellsouth.net (Chancie) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 08:16:03 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] We have a release date References: Message-ID: <009001c7460b$81fb1990$0201a8c0@your4dacd0ea75> No: HPFGUIDX 164439 __ Yes, it is officially confirmed. "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" will be released July 21st 2007 (meaning only a week after the fifth movie). There's a news on JKR's website: (Im a bit miffed, that she didn't put it behind the locked doort like last time, but oh well). ;-) Hickengruendler, feeling the excitement rise again ********************************************************************** Chancie: Also thought it was odd that she simply placed it in the "news" and didn't even mention it in the "diary". Could this be the "Pillar of Storge" all over again? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Feb 1 15:03:25 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:03:25 -0000 Subject: Christian Forgiveness and Snape (was Would Harry forgiving ) In-Reply-To: <006901c745a6$bc324fd0$c77e400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164440 > Magpie: > Personally I have no problem with Dumbledore not saying "I'm sorry for your > loss," but I don't know where you're getting "cold" from this scene. Pippin: I can't speak for Alla, but Dumbledore insists on cutting every single one of Harry's heroes down to size, not allowing Harry to idolize his godfather, implying that James did irreparable damage to Snape, and admitting that he himself has been weak and foolish. Then there's that brutally insensitive "I know how you feel." My sense is that's not how Alla and many others would like to see a man who's supposed to be wise and good deal with a bereaved child. But JKR isn't writing a textbook on how one deals with a bereaved child, she's writing a novel about a bereaved child whose upbringing and situation are extremely peculiar. If Dumbledore had said something gentle and encouraging about Harry's need to grieve for his loss, Harry would have clammed up and not said anything -- his instinct as we saw in HBP, is to avoid talking about Sirius at all. So Dumbledore used a little reverse psychology. The "I know how you feel" elicits a fierce denial, and soon Harry is telling Dumbledore exactly how he feels. Sirius's mistakes had to be pointed out because the more Harry idolizes Sirius, the more he demonizes everyone who contributed to his death, and the more guilt is generated to be pushed off onto Snape and others. Magpie: I think Dumbledore was actually giving in this scene *exactly* the kind of stuff people were demanding of the Queen. "Show us you care!" the headline said--Dumbledore is Showing He Cares! Pippin: But you were saying Dumbledore came across as self-serving and manipulative, right? *Harry* doesn't leave feeling that he's been used or that Dumbledore doesn't care about him. It's Dumbledore's public, his unseen and unknown body of readers, (some of them) who aren't satisfied with his behavior in the scene. Dumbledore is giving Harry what he thinks Harry needs, formed by his culture and understanding of Harry, not by ours. > Magpie: > The danger's still there right now so he has to remind Harry that he wasn't a pampered Prince when he got to Hogwarts? So what I'm getting here is that Dumbledore really has issues with kids being pampered--so much so that he does see that as a plus with the Dursleys that he's pleased about. Pippin: I agree with you about the issue. But it's a relevant issue, because the responsibility for seeing that Harry doesn't receive the pampered prince treatment is now no longer in Dumbledore's hands. Now that Harry knows he's the Chosen One, he could demand to be treated as such. Heck, he could threaten the Dursleys into it. And it still wouldn't be good for him. Pippin From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Thu Feb 1 15:06:27 2007 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:06:27 -0000 Subject: We have a release date In-Reply-To: <009001c7460b$81fb1990$0201a8c0@your4dacd0ea75> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164441 WHOOooo - It's true! We finally get to find out - everything! well, at least everything she's going to let us know! Oh, how brilliant is that! Thankyou, thankyou, thankyou JKR! XXXX AmanitaMuscaria --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chancie" wrote: > > __ > Yes, it is officially confirmed. "Harry Potter and the Deathly > Hallows" will be released July 21st 2007 (meaning only a week after > the fifth movie). There's a news on JKR's website: (Im a bit miffed, > that she didn't put it behind the locked doort like last time, but oh > well). ;-) > > Hickengruendler, feeling the excitement rise again > > > > ********************************************************************** > > Chancie: > > Also thought it was odd that she simply placed it in the "news" > > and didn't even mention it in the "diary". Could this be the > > "Pillar of Storge" all over again? > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > From dougsamu at golden.net Thu Feb 1 15:08:34 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 10:08:34 -0500 Subject: We have a release date Message-ID: <9E14C3FE-DFBF-4357-8D2D-9057DE41061D@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164442 Geoff: It's also on BBC Ceefax news as well. So, since it isn't 07/07/07, it rather torpedoes one of the favourites of the "Sevens" conspiracy theorists... Doug: 21 is of course made up of three sevens. Google submits to Chinese Gov't. Tibetan cybercafe warning: "Do not use Internet for any political or unintelligent purposes." ____________________ From emmaejones at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 14:42:53 2007 From: emmaejones at gmail.com (cassyvablatsky) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 14:42:53 -0000 Subject: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164443 Hello everyone, (my first post!) [:)] Interesting thread... as people have commented on the scarcity of JKR's references to McGonagall, I thought I might supply what we do have on the subject... Incidentally, I've always assumed that JKR uses Dumbledore's mantra regarding honesty when talking to her fans: `The truth is a beautiful and terrible thing, and should therefore be treated with great caution. However, I shall answer your questions, unless I have a very good reason not to, in which case I beg you'll forgive me. I shall not, of course, lie.' (PS17) (It's what makes me think that Regulus is really dead.) JKR implies that McGonagall is a strong, positive female role model: Lydon, Christopher. J.K. Rowling interview transcript, The Connection (WBUR Radio), 12 October, 1999 Question: Do you get criticisms that you don't have enough females in strong positions in your stories? Answer: Er - if you look down the - the staff-list in - in the school, you will find that it is exactly 50% women and 50% men as teachers. Now, people possibly don't realise that enough. I see Professor McGonagall, for example, as a - as a very strong female character. I did get an email the other day from someone in America saying 'when are we going to see a strong female character?' And I wrote back and told her that I was deeply offended because I think Hermione and Professor McGonagall are very strong characters ... but I did say to her 'but if you mean a nasty female character - er - wait till book four!' (My Italics) JKR lets us know that McGonagall is compassionate (and emotional): "About the Books: transcript of J.K. Rowling's live interview on Scholastic.com," Scholastic.com, 16 October 2000 Question: In the second book, Harry and Ron went to the girls' toilet and met McGonagall. They told her that they were going to visit Hermione, and she started crying. Why? Answer: She found it very touching that Harry and Ron were missing Hermione so badly (or so she thought). Under that gruff exterior, Professor McGonagall is a bit of an old softy, really. (My Italics) JKR says that she loves Professor McGonagall (comparing her to Dumbledore and Hagrid): Couric, Katie. Interview of J.K. Rowling, NBC Today Show, 20 October 2000 Question: Who is your favourite teacher or staff member at Hogwarts and why? Answer: It's a tie really between Dumbledore and Hagrid. But I also love Professor McGonagall. She's a great teacher. (My Italics) JKR tells us that an old teacher, of whom she was `extremely fond', may have influenced the character of McGonagall: Ballard, Nigel. Interview, BBCi Bristol, 12 November, 2001 Question: Harry Potter's new school, Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, is full of magic, even outside lessons. It's a boarding school, located in a remote part of the British Isles. All the teachers have strange powers, and can perform tricks. But were any of their antics inspired by any of Joanne's old teachers? Answer: Oh, no one... no. I have been interested to read, continually, that I've based characters on people ? I, I never do base them on ? I did have teachers, in a plural, who were bullies, erm, who may have contributed to certain characters, but it would be totally wrong to say any one teacher became any one character. I had an English teacher, Miss Shepherd, of whom I was extremely fond... er, she was a great teacher. She may, unconsciously, have influenced Professor McGonagall, for example, but I never, ever thought, She is Professor McGonagall. At all. (My Italics) JKR says that if a teacher is head of a Hogwarts house, we can assume they were in that house as a student: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=62 JKR says that the teachers don't stay at Hogwarts during the holidays: http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/0700-swns-alfie.htm JKR says that a few of the Hogwarts professors have (had) spouses, but that the information is restricted: http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2001/0301-bbc-rednose.htm JKR says that there is something more to the cats appearing in the books than first meets the eye: http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-scholastic-chat.htm JKR says that although McGonagall is not Dumbledore's equal, she is a `worthy' second in command: Anelli, Melissa and Spartz, Emerson. "The Leaky Cauldron and Mugglenet interview Joanne Kathleen Rowling: Part One," The Leaky Cauldron, 16 July 2005 Answer: In fact, I would tend to think that being very, very intelligent might create some problems and it has done for Dumbledore, because his wisdom has isolated him, and I think you can see that in the books, because where is his equal, where is his confidante, where is his partner? He has none of those things. He's always the one who gives, he's always the one who has the insight and has the knowledge. So I think that, while I ask the reader to accept that McGonagall is a very worthy second in command, she is not an equal. You have a slightly circuitous answer, but I can't get much closer than that. (My Italics) NB: It's interesting that JKR implies that this lack of confidantes is a problem with Dumbledore, not McGonagall! It's his weaknesses/vulnerabilities that are being discussed. Dumbledore is solitary by nature... as far as we know, he doesn't share his thinking on Horcruxes with (old friend) Moody, (bright, young protegee) Lupin or (second-in-command) McGonagall. Snape is another matter; Snape probably knows a lot anyway. (As for the confused Dumbledore/McGonagall relationship in the first chapter of PS/SS, it's worth bearing in mind that this chapter is mostly expositional. Indeed, JKR's already had to remove the notorious reference to 'Sirius Black' for the lack of internal logic in Dumbledore's response to Black's name at this point.) I'm with Carol in believing that McGonagall is basically what she seems, (which makes a change!). Also, I think that standard!McGonagall serves several important purposes: -McGonagall is a wise and powerful female leader (& quite talented at dueling as we saw in HBP!) -McGonagall (along with Lupin) is JKR's ideal teacher: respected (not feared) by the students, determined to do her best for them, equally determined that they should do their bests for her, strict and clever, with high standards and a gift for communication, entirely without favoritism (but with a shrewd idea of who the troublemakers are in her class!) -McGonagall is important as a mentor for Hermione. (This is rather touchingly understated, but I expect that McGonagall was always especially interested in Muggle-born Hermione with her obvious talent and her huge anxiety not to disappoint!) She also shows strong faith in Neville. -McGonagall provides pastoral care for the students of Gryffindor/Hogwarts (whereas Dumbledore is more distant) and she has significant role in Harry's moral education. -McGonagall defends Harry from Snape ? whom she balances nicely ? and champions his ambition to become an Auror. (In classical mythology, `Minerva' was a benevolent goddess, though stern and just ? the champion of heroes ? who protected her favourites from rival gods/goddesses). -McGonagall has fond memories of teaching the Marauders, providing an important link to Harry's past. -McGonagall, Snape, Flitwick and Sprout were all loyal to Dumbledore (so I believe!), confirming DD's fitness to lead the Four Houses. -McGonagall (along with Hagrid) was a contemporary of Tom Riddle. (And I do think this is interesting; especially, in view of the fact that Voldemort's old schoolmates are mostly too scared to talk. There's unfinished business between Hagrid & Riddle. There might well be some between McGonagall & Riddle. She was probably good enough for him to notice... as a rival. And maybe she was attracted to his brilliance. I could see him taunting her in Book 7. But if she did ever have a crush on him then it's long past, IMHO... Minerva McGonagall couldn't be more different to Hepzibah Smith! In any case, I'm looking forward to meeting Mr. McGonagall. :-)) Whereas after Quirrell and Moody-Crouch, we've just about exhausted the dramatic possibilities of an unforeseen traitor within Hogwarts - and EE!McGonagall or even ESE!McGonagall in Book 7 would be almost the equivalent of a new main character, IMHO, which we don't need at this stage, especially with all the outstanding ambiguity over Snape. Book 7 is the time for resolutions, not more questions. Besides, Rufus Scrimgeour is my idea of a traitor-in-waiting...! So while people are right to notice that Dumbledore confides in Harry more than his de juro second-in-command at the end of HBP, I think this is meant to show the uniqueness of the Harry-Dumbledore bond (the Chosen One and his Mentor) and not to signal that McGonagall is untrustworthy. Dumbledore would not have left Hogwarts in the care of an unworthy successor (after all, the Head's Office sealed itself against Umbridge) and he has already indicated his confidence in McGonagall as a deputy: 'He [Dumbledore] will not be single-handed!' said Professor McGonagall loudly, plunging her hand inside her robes. 'Oh yes he will, Minerva!' said Dumbledore sharply. 'Hogwarts needs you!' (OOtP27) I believe that McGonagall is simply trying to do what is right when she questions Harry at the end of HBP. She is clearly very shaken by Dumbledore's death and believes that Harry might have information she needs to know. But in the end, she allows him to leave her office and protects him from the Ministry. I think that McGonagall will play a significant part in Book 7, as a loyal member of the Order of the Phoenix and as a Headmistress defending Hogwarts from siege. But Harry has the greatest task of all and Dumbledore's decision to confide in him (and by extension Ron and Hermione) symbolises the passing of the torch from one generation to another as Dumbledore says towards the end of the book: `I am not worried, Harry. I am with you' (HBP26). Cassy V. http://book7.co.uk/ P.S. KJ wrote: One of the reasons that I find McGonagall interesting is because Dumbledore is a compulsive collector of strays. He has Hagrid, a half giant, who would not be accepted in WW society. He has Flitwick, also a half-breed, who's non-human half would not be accepted. We have Snape, who is a Death Eater, and would be hard pressed to find suitable employment outside of Hogwarts, and we have Sybill, who is rather too fond of the cooking sherry. We also have Firenze, who has been thrown out of his herd, and has nowhere else to go. Good point. (Though I suppose we also have some rather more conventional members of staff who are just good teachers (Sprout, Hooch etc.) ? and resented for it in the case of poor old Grubbly-Plank!) But the idea of McGonagall as a 'stray' made me think of her visiting Arabella Figg in her Animagus form... what does she make of Mr. Paws & Mr. Tibbles, I wonder? What did she make of Padfoot?! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sam2sar at charter.net Thu Feb 1 15:31:50 2007 From: sam2sar at charter.net (Stephanie) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:31:50 -0000 Subject: Great News Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164444 July 21, 2007 is going to be a great day. Ya hoo. I guess all that 7/7/07 speculation wasn't to far off. Happy day everyone, Sam From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 1 15:38:01 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:38:01 -0000 Subject: Christian Forgiveness and Snape (was Would Harry forgiving ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164445 > Magpie: > I think Dumbledore was actually giving in this scene *exactly* the > kind of stuff people were demanding of the Queen. "Show > us you care!" the headline said--Dumbledore is Showing He Cares! > > Pippin: > But you were saying Dumbledore came across as self-serving and > manipulative, right? Magpie: Yes. You can be both. Sometimes the two things go together well. It seems like second nature to Dumbledore to be isolated, watching from a bird's eye view, and yet also feel his compassion gives him understanding of what everyone's going through. I think his "weak and foolish" confession is what he'd *like* to say his flaws are, not what they really are (at least not the way he's presenting the weakness as foolishness). That's the thing about his not having any equals in canon. With other characters there's always somebody else there giving another view. With Dumbledore the opposite view comes from bad guys who are beneath him. Pippin: > > *Harry* doesn't leave feeling that he's been used or that Dumbledore > doesn't care about him. It's Dumbledore's public, his unseen and > unknown body of readers, (some of them) who aren't satisfied with his > behavior in the scene. > > Dumbledore is giving Harry what he thinks Harry needs, formed by > his culture and understanding of Harry, not by ours. Magpie: Yes, I know. But this isn't the first time my take on something's been different than Harry's. My own issues with Dumbledore in the scene don't have to do with the way Harry feels at the end of it. I'm not furious on Harry's behalf that Dumbledore dares criticize Sirius to him because Harry needs him to be perfect, and it would be very out of character for Harry to think about Dumbledore's words the way I do; he just doesn't think the way I do most of the time. I think Dumbledore is giving Harry what he, Dumbledore, needs (and part of that is wanting to give Harry what he needs)--which is certainly formed by his own culture or understanding as everything is. But the idea that Dumbledore feels it's important to cut Harry's heroes down to size, etc., (as opposed to honestly explaining himself) is just as much a personal interpretation as my own view of what Dumbledore's saying. Perhaps JKR is taking that chance to guide us as to how we're supposed to feel about the situation. I'm not really sure there's supposed to be any gap between Dumbledore's culture/understanding and the readers. > > Magpie: > > The danger's still there right now so he has to remind Harry that > he wasn't a pampered Prince when he got to Hogwarts? So what I'm > getting here is that Dumbledore really has issues with kids being > pampered--so much so that he does see that as a plus with the > Dursleys that he's pleased about. > > Pippin: > I agree with you about the issue. But it's a relevant issue, because > the responsibility for seeing that Harry doesn't receive the pampered > prince treatment is now no longer in Dumbledore's hands. Now > that Harry knows he's the Chosen One, he could demand to be > treated as such. Heck, he could threaten the Dursleys into it. > And it still wouldn't be good for him. Magpie: This is one of the things I actually never get about the whole idea that Harry knowing about his fame would put him in danger of this kind of arrogance. Because the Dursleys' type upbringing holds just as much if not more danger for the same thing. If a kid grows up despised, and then suddenly finds out he's the Savior of the World, he would potentially be much more vulnerable to having his head turned by going from one extreme to another because his self-esteem is already screwed up. My instinct if somebody was asking me what I thought would be the best way would be to have the kid raised by people who didn't treat him special, but cared about him. That seems like the best bet for giving him a strong personality that can withstand sudden fame at age 11. That seems borne out by a lot of stories of child stars as well. Every kid is different, though, and obviously Harry was fine without getting that. But I'm still not getting how Dumbledore's bringing that up here somehow has to do with Harry. I don't see anything in the scene that would suggest he's warning Harry not to become a Pampered Prince now, or responding to any danger Harry will become one. Harry's not demanded to be treated like anything (and if he did people wouldn't have to give him what he wanted). If that is a real fear Dumbledore seems to me to be doing the opposite of dealing with it: he's complimenting Harry on his great character (telling him he's not a Pampered Prince, he's the best!) and acts like Harry's owed an explanation for not being given the Prefect position, as if he was right to feel entitled to it. That incident is a rare place in canon where Harry *is* treated like a normal kid, where his success or failure isn't part of any grand drama. The attention just goes to somebody else. Yet rather than let Harry deal with that like all other kids do, Dumbledore jumps in to assure him that it really was part of the drama, and of course Harry deserved it more. -m From chezcreations at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 15:19:41 2007 From: chezcreations at gmail.com (Chez) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:19:41 -0000 Subject: We have a release date In-Reply-To: <9E14C3FE-DFBF-4357-8D2D-9057DE41061D@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164446 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, doug rogers wrote: > > Geoff: > It's also on BBC Ceefax news as well. > > So, since it isn't 07/07/07, it rather torpedoes one of the > favourites of the "Sevens" > conspiracy theorists... > > Doug: > 21 is of course made up of three sevens. chezcreations: Well as the one that posted the release date of 070707, I feel hurt....I wasn't a theorist, my girlfriend works for a bookstore in the US and that is the date that they had been given! Which apparently went unquestioned because she had said something about the number 7 being special or something to her....No theory fact! Obviously they told stores that so that they geared up and interestingly enough you are not only right about 3 x 7 =21 if you look at it that way but here is another 7 creeping in.....the expected release day was the 7th....now the 21st...exactly 14 days after the expected! Coincidence? I don't know!? From chezcreations at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 15:27:29 2007 From: chezcreations at gmail.com (Chez) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:27:29 -0000 Subject: OMG the audio book read by Stephen Fry will be released at the same time! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164447 So he will be the first non-publisher person to read it......that should make him feel special....can you imagine the security around the recording studio and him!!!!! 'Chez' From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 15:59:16 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:59:16 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Harry WAS: Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164448 > Magpie: I think his "weak > and foolish" confession is what he'd *like* to say his flaws are, > not what they really are (at least not the way he's presenting the > weakness as foolishness). That's the thing about his not having any > equals in canon. With other characters there's always somebody else > there giving another view. With Dumbledore the opposite view comes > from bad guys who are beneath him. Alla: YES, yes, me too :) Magpie: > I'm not furious on Harry's behalf that Dumbledore dares criticize > Sirius to him because Harry needs him to be perfect, and it would be > very out of character for Harry to think about Dumbledore's words > the way I do; he just doesn't think the way I do most of the time. Alla: Oh, could you clarify that part, please? As I said many times this part I find one of the most despicable parts of Dumbledore's speech. And **not** because he criticises Sirius, but because he criticised the man, who just died and the man whom Harry loved. Are you saying that you are Okay with that part of his speech? Or are you saying that you are not okay even if Harry is? >> > Pippin: > > I agree with you about the issue. But it's a relevant issue, > because > > the responsibility for seeing that Harry doesn't receive the > pampered > > prince treatment is now no longer in Dumbledore's hands. Now > > that Harry knows he's the Chosen One, he could demand to be > > treated as such. Heck, he could threaten the Dursleys into it. > > And it still wouldn't be good for him. > > Magpie: > This is one of the things I actually never get about the whole idea > that Harry knowing about his fame would put him in danger of this > kind of arrogance. Because the Dursleys' type upbringing holds just > as much if not more danger for the same thing. If a kid grows up > despised, and then suddenly finds out he's the Savior of the World, > he would potentially be much more vulnerable to having his head > turned by going from one extreme to another because his self-esteem > is already screwed up. My instinct if somebody was asking me what I > thought would be the best way would be to have the kid raised by > people who didn't treat him special, but cared about him. Alla: Magpie, we are on the same page again, yes. But what I do not get is not only the argument that Dumbledore somehow gets a right of telling Harry about the dangers of being extremely pampered, after he stuck the kid with Dursleys, but also where exactly are the dangers for Harry to be pampered now? Suddenly after sixteen years Dursleys would start pampering him? I doubt it. IMHO Alla From emmaejones at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 16:43:32 2007 From: emmaejones at gmail.com (cassyvablatsky) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 16:43:32 -0000 Subject: We have a release date In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164449 > Geoff: > It's also on BBC Ceefax news as well. > > So, since it isn't 07/07/07, it rather torpedoes one of the favourites of the "Sevens" > conspiracy theorists... > :-) > I suspect: a) JKR wanted to be sensitive to the second anniversary of the July 7th bombings in London. b) the end of the school term is usually around July 21st. c) the film opening on July 13th will start the build up to July 21st, instead of being upstaged by an earlier publication date. Exciting though... isn't it? (To think she's finished, I mean! I'd resigned myself to wait for October.) Cassy V. http://book7.co.uk/ From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Feb 1 16:52:02 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 16:52:02 -0000 Subject: Christian Forgiveness and Snape (was Would Harry forgiving ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164450 > Magpie: > Yes. You can be both. Sometimes the two things go together well. It > seems like second nature to Dumbledore to be isolated, watching > from a bird's eye view, and yet also feel his compassion gives him > understanding of what everyone's going through. I think his "weak > and foolish" confession is what he'd *like* to say his flaws are, > not what they really are (at least not the way he's presenting the > weakness as foolishness). Jen: Whatever Dumbledore calls it, it's pretty harsh to stand there in front of someone and talk the way Dumbledore talked. To tell Harry not only his views on Sirius and Snape right after Sirius *died*, but to go on and on about how his main flaw was caring about Harry too much when he's standing there hurting Harry in that very moment...! Dumbledore is asking for it here, he's expecting big repurcussions. Harry can't really make a choice until he knows *everything*, the fact that Dumbledore has these thoughts about Sirius and Snape, that he identified his caring as a flaw, that he made choices about Harry's life that may not have been what Lily and James would have wanted could they have imagined what would occur! So Dumbledore wasn't even considering what Harry's dead parents would have wanted for him--what parent could choose blood protection over love, warmth and real home? He's telling Harry he made a choice based on the information he had at the time and what *he* believed was right. And I believe he shut off his compassion for Harry to make that choice, 'the twinkling light that usually shone from Dumbledore's eyes seemed to have gone out', and attempted to replace it with compassion for the WW. The audacity of what he's done, and the fact that he justifies his reasoning for it makes it even more unbelievable. But Dumbledore failed, didn't he? The fact that Harry can still trust Dumbledore and care about him is a testament to Harry, not Dumbledore, because Harry hears between all the jibber-jabber that no matter what Dumbledore believed he should have done, he couldn't stop himself from caring deeply about Harry in the end. That's Harry's power to me, right there, a perfect example of how he doesn't operate like *most* people would in that circumstance. Jen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 16:54:27 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 16:54:27 -0000 Subject: Flitwick, Duelling Champ? WAS Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164451 Carol earlier: > > I know I'm going to be jumped on for this, but I still think that the rumor about Flitwick being a duelling champion was a joke circulated by the students. > > zgirnius: > I've always thought it was true. And very funny that it therefore > inspired Lockhart to enlist Snape, merely the Potions Master and > *snicker* an inexpert duellist, as his assistant instead. Flitwick > would have been very nice and friendly about the whole thing, I am > sure. Snape...well, we saw how he was. (Love that scene...) Carol: Yes, I love that scene, too. It's funny seeing Snape show up Lockhart's incompetence in front of half the school. Snape is very much in control (contrast Lockhart with his pixies) and stops all the hexes and jinxes in the room with a single spell, not to mention that he teaches the kids Expelliarmus, probably the most useful DADA spell in the book. I don't know about anyone else, but I started wondering whether Snape was something more than a Potions whiz at this point, especially in light of his early remark about "silly wand waving." (He does quite a bit of wand-waving himself, from cleaning up spills to writing spells on the board, and this scene shows that he *can* wave a wand in a way that's anything but silly. So what is that remark about? Sour grapes for not being assigned the DADA class?) > > Carol: > > We don't hear any more about it; he either faints at the prospect of a real battle or is knocked out and sent to the hospital wing (with a bruise on his forehead from a spell that knock you backwards?) from a Stunning spell > > zgirnius: > There's a simple solution here, which you seem to be overlooking. If > he was struck by a Stunning Spell from behind, from a person he > trusted, his reflexes and experience would be irrelevant. It would > also explain why the bruise is on his forehead - Snape's spell did > knock him back (away from Snape) so that he fell forwards. Carol: I hadn't thought about that. But Snape would have had to attack him with his back turned, and I think Flitwick would have said something about that. He doesn't even mention being Stunned, does he? I think it's only Hermione who comes up with that interpretation of events. Still, a Stunning spell doesn't normally knock people out or give them a bruise. As I said in the part you snipped, a simple Ennervate wakes most wizards, and they're back on their feet. Flitwick seems unusually fragile. And, of course, if he really *did* faint, he doesn't exactly have nerves of steel. > > Carol: > > McGonagall sends him as a messenger to Snape instead of using those duelling skills against the DEs. > > zgirnius: > Aha! ESE!Minerva strikes again, removin gthe most[otent weapon on her side in a crisis!! (Just kidding. This is a good point. Unless she > thought Snape needed to know about the Death Eaters? Or, perhaps > Flitwick is getting on in years and she's worried about his health?) Carol: Thanks. But she's getting on in years, too. Why not go to Snape herself, or said a healthy young messenger like Tonks who can get to him quickly? I think she was using the weakest member of the team as messenger. And if Flitwick was so good at duelling, why not hire *him* as DADA teacher? True, there's a jinx on the job, but what could it do to him except cause him to retire a bit early? Better Flitwick as DADA teacher than Umbridge, who taught them nothing except obedience to the Ministry's official line. > > Carol: > > Even Lockhart, who needs a duelling partner, chooses Snape (whose claim to know "a teeny bit" about duelling is probably deliberate minimizing on Lockhart's part. I can't imagine Snape using that phrase, especially with regard to his considerable skills in that area). > > zgirnius: > I think Lockhart did not want a skilled partner. He knows he's a fake, and he wants to make himself look good. And while 'teeny' is not a word I picture Snape using, I could see him claiming to have a 'passing familiarity' with duelling, or some such, when asked, rather than stating that he's very good. He's not been very open about his (considerable) talents in several areas of magic. Lockhart, of course, would probably imagine that such a statement by Snape is an overestimate of his capabilities, because Lockhart himself is quite boastful. > Carol: With regard to Snape, I agree. Possibly Dumbledore suggested Snape and Snape admitted (with a curl to his lip) to having some familiarity with duelling. (No doubt he saw it as a chance to give the kids some real DADA lessons.) But his reaction when Lockhart says that Snape knows a "teeny bit" about duelling indicates to me that Lockhart is doing some minimizing of his own, placing Snape in the role of magician's assistant to a fraud. (No wonder he's so eager to show Lockhart up!) But to return to Flitwick, surely Lockhart would have heard the rumor if it were actually circulating and asked him first? He'd think he'd have no trouble against someone half his height, just as he thought he'd have no trouble against Cornish pixies. The thing is, I don't think Lockhart recognizes his own incompetence. He's so used to living a lie that he believes his own stories about defeating Banshees and Vampires, so of course in his own mind he'd have no trouble defeating a former duelling champion. The better the opponent, the better he'll look defeating them. Also, you snipped my most important point. Flitwick is so light that a simple Summoning or Banishing Charm sends him zooming over the students' heads in his own classroom. Imagine that happening in a duel or a battle with DEs--or what a stronger DADA spell like Expelliarmus would do to him. Or how about four Stunners to the chest if just one Stunner knock him out? I think both McGonnagall and Snape wanted him safely out of the action. So even if the rumor that Flitwick was a duelling champion in his youth isn't just a joke circulated by kids who've sent him flying with an Accio or knocked him off his stacks of books with a stray Banishing charm, I don't think that duelling other students in his youth makes him particular useful against ruthless opponents twice his height and two or three times his weight. Carol, who has nothing whatever against tiny people and rather likes Flitwick, but doesn't think his Charms expertise makes him a duelling champion any more than McGonagall's knowledge of Transfiguration makes her a DADA expert From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Feb 1 17:01:19 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:01:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) Message-ID: <11503346.1170349279744.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164452 >> >>Carol: >> Maybe Harry is just a bit more mature than Ron (which I hate to say >> because I like Ron, but he's very much a kid even at seventeen). > >Betsy Hp: >That's probably what JKR is going for, yes. Personally I don't like >the idea that an interest in sex is a mark of the immature but there >you are. And of course, Ron's interest is always couched in comic >terms. Whereas Harry is always more interested in personality than >looks, bless him. (Um, unless of course it's a guy. ) Bart: This also emphasizes Harry's resistance to mind control. One must assume that an Imperious Curse gives a LOT more pleasure than viewing an attractive member of the gender with whom one would normally mate. Here's a thought: Is the Imperious Curse addictive? From the description, it SHOULD be. Bart From jeanico2000 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 17:05:25 2007 From: jeanico2000 at yahoo.com (jeanico2000) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:05:25 -0000 Subject: One thing that worries me... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164454 I don't know if I'm alone or not in thinking this, but I sometimes worry that J.K. might have caved in under pressure to write and finish this book quickly so that it could be published in 2007, and that as a result of this we will be left with a whole lot of plot holes and unanswered questions and maybe even an ending that is unsatisfactory. I think I'll be (almost) scared to read book 7! I hope that J.K. is not an easy lady to influence... *sigh* Nicole PS: I'm so going to miss this series when it ends! From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Feb 1 17:09:04 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:09:04 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) Message-ID: <26906507.1170349744148.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164455 inishumina: > >I in part agree with both Steve and Magpie, calling someone a gentleman >is rare these days and from what I have read there seems to be more in >Gryffindor than Slytherin, though Slytherin are much more confident >about themselves in this matter. We have to also remember they are just >school kids and that's just how they act around the opposite sex at >that age. Bart: You must have come from a different class of schoolkids. The way I recall it, when I was 15-17 years old, if there were a young but mature, attractive woman who obeyed my every command, I'm not sure if I, or any of my straight male schoolmates, could have resisted the temptation, and I WAS a gentleman (maybe a bit too much of one, according to the girls I dated at the time, who claimed that they had to practically hit me over the head and drag me off to get the response for which they were looking). As far as rape goes, I think using Imperious goes well beyond rape. Bart From jnferr at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 17:15:14 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 11:15:14 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8ee758b40702010915n6f29090cjde47dabc46837312@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164456 > Betsy Hp: > Oh, I totally agree that the comedy of this moment was great. But it > suggests that either Ron walks around with a giant bag over his head > and cotton in his ears, or the Gryffindor boys (of any class present > when either Ron or his brothers attended Hogwarts) have never > considered raiding the girls' dorm. Which is not very realistic, > IMO. (Nor is the fact that the girls haven't raided the boys dorm.) montims: I'm a Brit who went to an all-girls school, so I may be being dense here, but why on earth would the girls raid the boys or vice versa? We know they have house parties - in the common room - but I would find it very rude (as in badmannered) to have fellow students coming en masse into my sleeping area uninvited... If I am missing something, please explain. From happydogue at aol.com Thu Feb 1 17:13:40 2007 From: happydogue at aol.com (happydogue at aol.com) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 12:13:40 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Flitwick, Duelling Champ? WAS Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <8C9143B74543E16-A0C-833F@MBLK-M12.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164457 I realize this would have never happened but I would like to imagine what things would have been like if the DA had asked Snape for assistance. He is/was a member of the Order. J in WI ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jnferr at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 17:20:52 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 11:20:52 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: We have a release date In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8ee758b40702010920x6a7b1363yc0fe6aec80939dd3@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164458 cassyvablatsky: > > I suspect: > > a) JKR wanted to be sensitive to the second anniversary of the July > 7th bombings in London. > b) the end of the school term is usually around July 21st. > c) the film opening on July 13th will start the build up to July 21st, > instead of being upstaged by an earlier publication date. montims: I agree with your reasoning, but it rather scuppers Sectus, and messes up Prophecy, which surprised me - I would have thought JKR and the publishers, etc, would have considered these conferences. I can understand that August is out of the question, due to the Festival in Edinburgh, and the consequent non-availability of rooms, but would have thought September more fitting - time for the film hysteria to die down and the book hysteria to build up; still school holidays; Sept 21st is autumn equinox, etc, but there - not my decision to make... From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 17:47:24 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:47:24 -0000 Subject: Flitwick, Duelling Champ? WAS Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164459 > Carol: > I don't know about anyone else, but I started wondering > whether Snape was something more than a Potions whiz at this point, > especially in light of his early remark about "silly wand waving." zgirnius; Oh, me too. I concluded he's probably pretty dangerous. (Though I didn't get a final confirmation of how right I was for another 4 books...) His willingness to tangle with Lupin and Sirius in PoA suggested it as well. Carol: > So what is that remark about? > Sour grapes for not being assigned the DADA class?) zgirnius: Perhaps. Or, perhaps it's more about resentment of the attitude his students have towards Potions. I'd say Snape knows it is real, and powerful, magic. I do think he loves the subject as well as DADA, I can't see having been such a creative genius at it at some point and then giving up on it altogether. Everyone expects DADA class to be coll and interesting. > Carol: I hadn't thought about that. But Snape would have had to attack > him with his back turned, and I think Flitwick would have said > something about that. He doesn't even mention being Stunned, does he? zgirnius: No, he does not, it maintains the ambiguity of what happened. If he hit his head upon being Stunned, though, he could be experiencing temporary memory loss. Or he could have just fainted, we don't know. His failure to recover, if it was Stunning, would probably be related to the bump on the head. While people usually recover from Stunning quickly, Flitwick could have happened to bump his head badly as he fell. (Since this kept Hermione and Luna out of action, this seemingly unlikely event could have been caused by Felix). > Carol: > And if Flitwick was so good at duelling, why not hire *him* as DADA > teacher? True, there's a jinx on the job, but what could it do to him > except cause him to retire a bit early? Better Flitwick as DADA > teacher than Umbridge, who taught them nothing except obedience to the > Ministry's official line. zgirnius: There is no indication he wants the job. And who would teach Charms? Also, I am not so sure DADA=duelling. It seems to me DADA, Charms, and Transfiguration are all branches of magic that may be of assistance to someone in a magical duel (judging from the most impressive one we have seen, DD vs. LV in OotP). Flitwick may not have any particular expertise or interest in the Dark Arts. > Carol: > But to return to Flitwick, surely Lockhart would have heard the rumor > if it were actually circulating and asked him first? zgirnius: AS I already said, I think the rumor would have had the opposite effect, of causing Lockhart to look elsewhere. He does back down when confronted by an authority (for example, when Snape pointed out HE's the Potions Master). Carol: > so of course in his own mind he'd have no trouble defeating > a former duelling champion. The better the opponent, the better he'll > look defeating them. zgirnius: Then why did he not take the golden opportunity Harry provided him to show his stuff at the end of CoS? Defeating Slytherin's monster would be the ultimate achievement. Order of Merlin, First Class and all. He didn't try, because he knew he couldn't. Carol: > Also, you snipped my most important point. Flitwick is so light that a > simple Summoning or Banishing Charm sends him zooming over the > students' heads in his own classroom. Imagine that happening in a duel > or a battle with DEs--or what a stronger DADA spell like Expelliarmus > would do to him. zgirnius: In a duel, if he was good, I imagine he would avoid them, or block them. In class, his mind is on other things. As bboyminn points out as well, a competitive duel is a controlled situation: there is exactly one source of potential danger (not an unpredictable class full of students or messy fight with DEs), and no obstacles like furniture, etc - just some arena-like flat area. Carol: > So even if the rumor that Flitwick was a duelling champion in his > youth isn't just a joke circulated by kids who've sent him flying with > an Accio or knocked him off his stacks of books with a stray Banishing > charm, I don't think that duelling other students in his youth makes > him particular useful against ruthless opponents twice his height and > two or three times his weight. zgirnius: I agree he might be past his fighting prime, we have not seen him in action. I do think your insistence that weight matters is wrong, though. One could equally suggest his short stature makes him a difficult target (his students aren't aiming for him). This is magic, not wrestling (though even there...my former Judo sensei was 5'8" and 135 lbs, and he competed successfully againt men well over 200 lbs in his youth). Lucius did not seem to think he could take Dobby, huge weight advantage notwithstanding. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 17:55:59 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:55:59 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702010915n6f29090cjde47dabc46837312@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164460 > montims: > I'm a Brit who went to an all-girls school, so I may be being dense > here, but why on earth would the girls raid the boys or vice versa? > We know they have house parties - in the common room - but I would > find it very rude (as in badmannered) to have fellow students coming > en masse into my sleeping area uninvited... If I am missing > something, please explain. zgirnius: I am an American who attended co-ed public (what WE mean by public) schools. But I did attend a co-ed summer camp when I was 8. Naturally, the boys and girls slept in different buildings, and we were further split up by age. Why they would do so is a mystery of the male mind, but it is a fact that the oldest group of boys 'raided' the room of the oldest group of girls one night after curfew (with the tacit approval of their counselor). These would have been 12-13 year olds. I think the girls found some way to get even, later, as well. But I think it is entirely possible the stair thing is not mentioned by the older boys, so that Ron and Harry don't know. After all, it must be funny for them to see younger boys not yet aware of the problem get tripped up by it as well. From elanor.isolda at googlemail.com Thu Feb 1 18:03:29 2007 From: elanor.isolda at googlemail.com (Elanor Isolda) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 18:03:29 +0000 Subject: HP&DH to be released at Sectus! Message-ID: <6493bc80702011003v37072d8cs8fc3935f367548ce@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164461 It All Ends at Sectus! The Sectus committee is currently rejoicing at the news that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, the final book in the series, is to be released during our conference. This means that Sectus is not only the biggest Harry Potter conference ever to have been held in Europe, but is also set to be the ultimate release party. In amongst the excitement, though, the Committee is hard at work making sure the event can be adapted to the new circumstances. We will bring you further details once the frantic phone calls and emails produce some results, but in the meantime we can confirm the following: * Arrangements are being made to secure books for all conference attendees who require them at midnight on the release date. * Space will be provided for those who wish to read through the night, at a location to be confirmed. * There will be a rigorous spoiler policy in effect throughout the event. If you want to read the book overnight on Friday night, you'll have two days to discuss and analyse the contents with hundreds of fellow fans. And for those who do not wish to read the book immediately, alternative programming will be provided, as originally planned, and there will be procedures in place to ensure that those who wish to avoid spoilers are able to do so. We set up Sectus with the aim of celebrating the beginning of Harry Potter, and now we're celebrating the end as well! If you would like to download the official Sectus press release concerning this news, it will be available shortly on our website at http://www.sectus.org/press.php And if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at chair at sectus.org. Regards Elanor Isolda Conference Chair Sectus 2007 -- Celebrate the tenth anniversary of Harry Potter in the country where it all began! http://www.sectus.org [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ameritrainscott at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 17:57:51 2007 From: ameritrainscott at yahoo.com (Scott) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:57:51 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows anagrams Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164462 http://wordsmith.org/anagram/anagram.cgi?anagram=deathlyhallows Lots of interesting words in there Hats, Owls, Leathal, Welt. I started looking at them and feel there may be something there. Anyone else want to post some interesting ones they find here? What a yell holds Hat held a sly owl A halo dwells thy -Scott From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Feb 1 18:16:35 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 18:16:35 -0000 Subject: Sex and the Hogwarts student... was (Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164463 I felt a need to join in the discussion regarding the question of sex at Hogwarts Just to begin with, a question of tattoos! In message 164406, I wrote: I don't think that proves - or disproves - anything. I'm sure that on a warm Saturday afternoon or after classes on a summer day, many of the boys would have their shirts off whiling away their time down on the grass by the lake, In message 164415 Sandy replied: Geoff, while I so hate to disagree with you, there is absolutely no cannon to support such a view and, furthermore, I think there is a little bit of movie contamination here. The kids at Hogwarts wear wizard robes and, based on Snape's Worst Memory, they wear nothing under them but undergarments. When James so unceremoniously yanked Snape in the air upside-down you will recall that it revealed his dingy, grey underpants. It is only in the movies that the kids wear uniforms under their robes. Therefore, if the male students were basking around the lake bare-chested, they would be doing so in nothing but their underwear. Even in the second task of the TWT the students entered the lake in their robes. Geoff: I think I might counter that by saying that there is no canon for your view. I agree that it is possible that students do not wear anything other than underwear beneath their robes, possibly because of the warmth of these garments. However, it is often normal practice for students to wear more casual clothes in an environment away from a classroom or a formal situation such as the second task. I cannot see them being in school uniform all through a weekend or in their "off-duty" hours. Just in passing, the incident with Snape occurred just after the students had been released from an examination. In the current threads discussing sex among the students, I feel that some posters are guilty of making sweeping generalisations. When I was training for teaching many moons ago, I had a lecturer who taught Maths and Psychology and one dictum he had was that "there is no such thing as the average or normal person", this hypothetical creature being the aggregation of all the various swings from the norm that we collectively add up to. So, in any situation such as Hogwarts, you can expect a whole range of approaches and attitudes to sex. Let's take Harry, and I shall make comparisons with myself. I am an only child. Although, like Harry, I went to a mixed school up to the age of eleven, I, like most of my peers, did not go to a boarding school but went to a single-sex grammar school and later to a single-sex training college. I had a number of male friends during my teens partly because boys tend to "gang" together at this age an d also because many of my interests were the sort that tended to appeal only to boys. So, by the time I was into my early twenties, I had not had a lot of regular contact with the opposite sex. I remember going to a college ball and taking a young lady whom I knew slightly and, as with Harry at the Yule Ball, it was something of a disaster! Even after a long marriage with a grown-up daughter threatening to make me a grandparent in September, I still find it difficult to interact with women and am often left baffled in trying to "read" them and their ideas. Nowadays, it is not true that every guy is trying to get a girl into bed at the earliest opportunity. I look at some of the young men currently in my church in their middle to late teens and find that, although they have relationships with the girls, they are not apparently overtly sexual. They have other interests at this age and I certainly get the feeling that, in the UK, the more sensible (and intelligent?) guys are not getting involved so soon. Pressures in education, from school to university, and the problem of getting settled in a career seem to take up a lot more of their time. So, I see no reason why Harry, of all people, Is odd in not getting too tied down with a girl friend. Saving the world takes a bit of concentration. Because of his background, he is something of a loner ? which I identify with again ? And I feel that he will make the right moves when the time is ripe. As I said earlier there is a wide range of responses Harry tends to being a loner; he doesn't always share things even with Ron and Hermione. Look at Neville who is more of a loner even than Harry and then you have an opposite such as Seamus whom I see as having an eye for the ladies. I did write some months ago that I would not be disappointed or worried if Harry continued in a bachelor state for some little while beyond his Hogwarts years. To round off, we have commented on the group before that we cannot have a blow-by-blow account of every day of Harry`s time at school ? especially his sexual development. I have commented on a couple of occasions about this in the past in the past: In message 160165, I wrote "And, with sexual development, in how many books involving young people would you find the question of wet dreams and as some one put it euphemistically and (amusingly) self-discovery aired as part of the plot of the story? Can you imagine Ron bouncing into breakfast, sitting down next to Harry and saying out loud "I've just had a smashing wet dream?" And, then again in message 162094, we had this exchange: > Cassy: > > I somehow think that ON PAGE are key words here. We actually > have no evidence that Harry reads much for pleasure, but we > have no evidence to the contrary. After all, we have only seen > him taking a bath on page once in GoF (the egg affair), but it > doesn't mean that it was the only time he washed in 6 year, right? > We don't see EVERY moment of Harry's life, only those important to the plot. Geoff: Neither have we seen him going to the toilet, having a wet dream or picking his nose in public. :-) Take these last couple of observations as being a little tongue-in-cheek. :-) From hpcentaur at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 17:58:15 2007 From: hpcentaur at yahoo.com (hpcentaur) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:58:15 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164464 Harry Potter is not a horcrux because then it would be against JKR's religion (Christianity). In the real world if someone has a other soul in him then the person is possessed, by a demon for example. But if someone is possessed then the demon (other soul) takes control of the body where it is in. If Harry was possessed then don't you think that Voldemort would just take control of Harry without having to do a ritual to come back to life? If Harry Potter was a horcrux then Voldemort would have come back earlier in the body of a small boy. The muggles that posts things that Harry Potter is a horcrux doesn't think that it is basically impossible to put a soul in a scar. Why is it impossible, because the scar is part of Harry's body. If a other soul is in the body then Harry would have been Voldemort. The other soul would have taken control of Harry. And I think that it would be too risky to put a other soul in an alive person. The person's soul would fight with the other's soul. If it was a dead person then it would have been a different case. The body would not stand the other soul. Harry would go insane, and as far as I know Harry isn't insane. He just gets visions from Voldemort. In the bible Joseph got visions from God. But in Harry Potter, Harry gets visions from Voldemort. They say that the mind can't tell the difference between real and dreams. That is why he felt the visions so extremely real. The point here is that Harry can't be a Horcrux because two souls can't live in one body. Post from, HPCentaur Go To http://harry-potter-harry-potter-swicki.eurekster.com to find Harry Potter websites. From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 1 18:36:30 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 18:36:30 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Harry WAS: Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164465 > Magpie: > > I'm not furious on Harry's behalf that Dumbledore dares criticize > > Sirius to him because Harry needs him to be perfect, and it would > be > > very out of character for Harry to think about Dumbledore's words > > the way I do; he just doesn't think the way I do most of the time. > > Alla: > > Oh, could you clarify that part, please? As I said many times this > part I find one of the most despicable parts of Dumbledore's speech. > And **not** because he criticises Sirius, but because he criticised > the man, who just died and the man whom Harry loved. > Are you saying that you are Okay with that part of his speech? > Or are you saying that you are not okay even if Harry is? Magpie: I think objectively, he's being insensitive. This is just Grief 101. It's not uncommon for people who have lost someone to complain later of people who felt they could give their judgment of the person to them soon after they died. You have to be very careful in these kinds of situations--sometimes something you think is sensitive and kind infuriates the bereaved. I can't think even Hermione would start analyzing a person's character this way hours after he died. But that isn't at the center of how I read the scene, maybe because it doesn't seem central to what Dumbledore is doing--it's not like he hates Sirius and can't wait to start tearing him down, that's just a side effect of whatever he is trying to get across. Maybe it doesn't bother me as much in itself because Harry calls Dumbledore on it. When someone in canon voices the objection it feels like it's been respected and said for you. Dumbledore's not being the perfectly sensitive person who says exactly what Harry needs to hear and makes him feel better--but that's okay. It's more interesting, probably, that he fumbles the ball here. JKR probably really prefers to keep Harry off-balance here, and not give him a soft moment of closure. I have, however, never been convinced by arguments that Dumbledore *needs* to cut Sirius down to size, that he's doing it for Harry. There's nothing in this book or this scene that points to Harry having too much regard for Sirius being a problem. OotP is the book where some of Harry's "heroes" get cut down, yes, but it happens organically as part of the story. It's not something Dumbledore has to explain to him. He sees James in the Pensieve. He sees Sirius falling apart at Grimmauld Place. If anything I'd say Harry's view of Sirius is perhaps at its most accurate in this moment--he was brave and miserable and all too vulnerable. Harry completely understands his hatred of Grimmauld Place and Kreacher and how insurmountable it felt to him. I don't have a problem with a lot of the conclusions Dumbledore draws about some of the people he's talking about. Though as I said, I think he's view of the Kreacher/Sirius connection is totally flawed. (Kreacher was not driven by Sirius hating him, but his love for the Black family. Sirius and Kreacher were both locked together in different kinds of pain symbolized by that house that went beyond Sirius having a disdain for Kreacher he could have overcome etc.) Harry is wrong in blaming Snape for Sirius leaving the house so I agree with Dumbledore there--though one would have to be careful in talking about that with Harry because you have to tiptoe around the issue that Sirius left the house for Harry and you don't want to make it seem like it's Harry's fault. (And as we see in HBP, Dumbledore's own spin didn't keep Harry from blaming Snape at all.) But it comes back to Dumbledore creating his own problems by launching into his "If Sirius had been nicer to Kreacher it wouldn't have happened and that's what we should do with House Elves" angle in response to a throwaway angry line of Harry's. He decides he has to defend Kreacher when Harry blames him for Sirius' death and hates him for it. He defends him by saying that Hermione was "quite right" to say Kreacher should have been treated with respect, and how he warned Sirius and how Sirius treated him badly and, well, look what happened. He doesn't say, "Hermione was right that Kreacher should have been treated with respect. But giving him presents while tearing away everything he loved isn't respect. We should have taken Kreacher's alliances more seriously. I thought his hatred of us and love for the Blacks couldn't be enough to hurt us, and I was wrong. I didn't respect his feelings or his mind enough to respect the threat he posed." That's looking at his own responsibility instead of saying what Sirius should have done. > > Magpie: > > This is one of the things I actually never get about the whole idea > > that Harry knowing about his fame would put him in danger of this > > kind of arrogance. Because the Dursleys' type upbringing holds just > > as much if not more danger for the same thing. If a kid grows up > > despised, and then suddenly finds out he's the Savior of the World, > > he would potentially be much more vulnerable to having his head > > turned by going from one extreme to another because his self- esteem > > is already screwed up. My instinct if somebody was asking me what I > > thought would be the best way would be to have the kid raised by > > people who didn't treat him special, but cared about him. > > > Alla: > > Magpie, we are on the same page again, yes. But what I do not get is > not only the argument that Dumbledore somehow gets a right of telling > Harry about the dangers of being extremely pampered, after he stuck > the kid with Dursleys, but also where exactly are the dangers for > Harry to be pampered now? > > Suddenly after sixteen years Dursleys would start pampering him? > > I doubt it. Magpie: Heh--maybe Harry should go home and tell them how important it is that he not be pampered. Perhaps they'd start just to spite him. -m From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 19:00:05 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 19:00:05 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164466 > >>Jen: > ...what parent could choose blood protection over love, > warmth and real home? > Betsy Hp: Um...me? This is the other side of the argument I really don't get. I can only assume that the assumption is that Harry wasn't in all that much danger. But if I were given the choice between a warm and loving home for a few years, then my son in Bellatrix's hands for a few hours, then death, I'd take the blood protection with the Dursley's thank you very much. Sure Harry suffered, but he's alive. Seriously, I would send my child to the Dursleys in a heartbeat if the choice was that or death. And many, many, many other parents have made that sort of decision before. My heart aches for them, but I totally understand and agree with their thinking. Betsy Hp From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 20:05:58 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 20:05:58 -0000 Subject: One thing that worries me... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164467 --- "jeanico2000" wrote: > > ... > I sometimes worry that J.K. might have caved in under > pressure to write and finish this book quickly so that > it could be published in 2007, and that as a > result of this we will be left with a whole lot of plot > holes ... > > Nicole > PS: I'm so going to miss this series when it ends! > bboyminn: Yet she chose mid-2007 when she could have picked October-2007 or December-2007. Personally, I had picked October in our previous discussions. At that time, JKR has said she was still busily writing and I allowed 6 months to get the book fully ready for sale. I think given the time she had been actively working on it, it was safe to assume she was nearing the end. So, I don't think she rushed it. She had something like 15 years to think about how this was all going to end, and relative to the release date of HBP, she has had two full years to write it. I don't think she was rushed. And again, I point out, if she needed more time she could have released 3 months later and no one would have know the difference or cared. Further as she and her Editors read and discuss the book there is still time for changes before the book goes into print. While you certainly have a valid point, I think the book was just ready, so they sent it off to the publishers. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 19:58:24 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 11:58:24 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702011158v1ef3fa8em44439e31c0a38a1d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164468 > >>Jen: > ...what parent could choose blood protection over love, > warmth and real home? > Betsy Hp: Um...me? This is the other side of the argument I really don't get. I can only assume that the assumption is that Harry wasn't in all that much danger. But if I were given the choice between a warm and loving home for a few years, then my son in Bellatrix's hands for a few hours, then death, I'd take the blood protection with the Dursley's thank you very much. Sure Harry suffered, but he's alive. Seriously, I would send my child to the Dursleys in a heartbeat if the choice was that or death. And many, many, many other parents have made that sort of decision before. My heart aches for them, but I totally understand and agree with their thinking. Betsy Hp ================== Jeremiah: I agree. I think that Harry has come out just fine and there was no other protection the Dumbledore could have given him that would serve him better from being murdered. The focus, for me, is "Shall we have Harry murdered or just messed up a bit." Because Harry has had the opportunities for corrective parenting and parental influences from many characters. Obviously Mr. & Mrs. Weasley, some heart to hearts with Lipin and Sirius, but then there's McGonagall (very matronly), Dumbledore, Madame Pomfrey and several others. The short-term effects of Harry living with the Dursleys are far outweighed by the parenting he has gotten at Hogwarts. I know there are some people who would like to chastise DD for nearly everything... maybe DD has had some devious plan to throw Harry to the wolves all along, but I feel it has been in preparation for what will come in the last book. DD admits that there are times when he has been shortsighted when it comes to Hary's needs and emotions. (end of OotP... that really, really long chapter where DD spills his guts to Harry). But all faterh-figures and mother-figures, even moms and dads themselves, make mistakes. there is no perfect childhood. Harry had to be at the Dursleys so he would not have been murdered and that's the highest priority, IMO. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ibchawz at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 20:12:15 2007 From: ibchawz at yahoo.com (ibchawz) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 20:12:15 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows anagrams In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164469 Scott wrote: > Lots of interesting words in there Hats, Owls, Leathal, Welt. I > started looking at them and feel there may be something there. Anyone > else want to post some interesting ones they find here? > > What a yell holds > Hat held a sly owl > A halo dwells thy ibchawz responds: How lethally sad - JKR has stated that characters are going to die. Had howls lately? - Maybe something to do with Lupin or Bill Weasley. Al welds thy halo - Albus making an angel out of someone or helping a fallen angel? Shallow thy lead - Sounds like a wild goose chase to me. ibchawz From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 20:23:39 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 20:23:39 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164470 --- "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > >>Jen: > > ...what parent could choose blood protection > > over love, warmth and real home? > > > > Betsy Hp: > Um...me? This is the other side of the argument I > really don't get. I can only assume that the > assumption is that Harry wasn't in all that much danger. > But if I were given the choice between a warm and > loving home for a few years, then my son in Bellatrix's > hands ... then death, I'd take the blood protection ... > > My heart aches for them, but I totally understand and > agree with their thinking. > > Betsy Hp > bboyminn: Once again I think we are trapped in the swirling vortex of reader vs character point-of-view. As readers we know things that the characters don't. We can analyse things in a way that is logical to us, but somewhat illogical to the characters. When Dumbledore made his judgement to place Harry under the Blood Protection at the Dursley, it was minutes after Voldemort's defeat. How could he predict the level of danger Harry would face? For all he knew the DE's could attack the Dursley's in force the very next day. It would have been irrational of Dumbledore to /assume the best/, reasonable logic would have him assume and plan for the worst possible case and do his best to guard against it. It is unfair of us to take our reader's knowledge of 15 years of accumulated events and push that back in time demanding that Dumbledore weigh it all when he made his decision. It's just not possible for Dumbledore or anyone to have that level of forsight. Dumbledore made his decision based on his knowledge of past and current events that were available to him at the time. AT THE TIME, keeping Harry alive AT ANY COST was his number one priority. I say that each time he heard a report of the Dursley's /unpleasantness/ Dumbledore just kept reminding himself that Harry was safe and alive, and that soon enough he would be at Hogwarts, and the opportunity would exist to try to undo some of the damage that might have been done at the Dursleys. Note that Harry has his character flaws that can be attributed to having been raised at the Dursley, but overal, that experience has made him the selfless, courageous, and compassionate person he is today. What is that old sports saying...? "No harm, no foul" Steve/bboyminn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 20:40:42 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 20:40:42 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164471 Steve/bboyminn: > Note that Harry has his character flaws that can be > attributed to having been raised at the Dursley, but > overal, that experience has made him the selfless, > courageous, and compassionate person he is today. Alla: Sorry, but it can be said just as well that Harry is the person he is despite being raised at the Dursleys, not **because of that** IMO. I do think that keeping Harry alive was the only reason to put him with Dursleys, but as I said many times I wish JKR would have shown blood protection in working. It would have been much more convincing to me, but unfortunately I am of the opinion that JKR came up with blood protection somewhere around writing GoF. IMO of course. Alla, Who thinks that Dumbledore should thank his lucky stars that Harry did not become another Tom Riddle or that he would not have been badly hurt when he was apparating on the roof, etc. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Feb 1 20:40:14 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 20:40:14 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164472 Betsy Hp: > Um...me? This is the other side of the argument I really don't get. > I can only assume that the assumption is that Harry wasn't in all > that much danger. But if I were given the choice between a warm and > loving home for a few years, then my son in Bellatrix's hands for a > few hours, then death, I'd take the blood protection with the > Dursley's thank you very much. Sure Harry suffered, but he's alive. Jen: I was sort of speaking rhetorically but since you mention it, I do think a parent can rationally make a tough choice in the face of immediate danger that would would be harder to make when considering possible future danger, i.e., Harry enduring the Dursleys year after year to ensure the blood protection. I'm not saying parents *shouldn't* make this choice, just that it's easier in immediate danger or hypothetically than if you have to watch your child suffer in the hopes that one day they may need the benefit you're providing them. Betsy: > Seriously, I would send my child to the Dursleys in a heartbeat if > the choice was that or death. And many, many, many other parents > have made that sort of decision before. My heart aches for them, but > I totally understand and agree with their thinking. Jen: I don't know if I could...I'd *want* to, I do believe rationally it would be the best protection. It's just sometimes parents are overcome by emotion in the face of logic and Dumbledore exemplifies that for me. The only way he seemed able to carry on with his 'plan' was to rationalize to himself it was for the greater good. Once he met Harry, his logic started to fail and emotion took over. The speech in OOTP was Dumbledore explaining exactly what his rationale was and the technical correctness of his plan, but how he couldn't sustain even the most logical plan once he felt connected to Harry as a real person. Mostly I empathize with Dumbledore in that scene, that's the bottom line when I think about it. Empathize with both of them: Harry for having lost so much and Dumbledore for making the choice to contribute to some of Harry's suffering. I suppose at times I overlook the way DD chose to deliver his information and notice only the stuff between the lines . From ameritrainscott at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 20:26:45 2007 From: ameritrainscott at yahoo.com (Scott) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 20:26:45 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows anagrams In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164473 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ibchawz" wrote: > Shallow thy lead - Sounds like a wild goose chase to me. > > ibchawz > Touche.... I really liked "The Old Hallways" and was feeling really clever, until a Google search proved I was not the first to see that one. Oh well, I still think it fits beautifully. It all happened in those "Hallowed Hallways". -Scott From kennclark at btinternet.com Thu Feb 1 21:03:29 2007 From: kennclark at btinternet.com (Kenneth Clark) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 21:03:29 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164474 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hpcentaur" wrote: > > Harry Potter is not a horcrux because then it would be against > JKR's religion (Christianity). In the real world if someone has > a other soul in him then the person is possessed, by a demon for > example. But if someone is possessed then the demon (other soul) > takes control of the body where it is in. If Harry was possessed > then don't you think that Voldemort would just take control of > Harry without having to do a ritual to come back to life? > > Ken replies: "in the real world" there isn't such a thing as a soul (that anyone has ever been able to find) and in any case it's just a story so even if Rowling believes in souls it doesn't mean she has to toe the party line in her fiction. Ken Clark From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Thu Feb 1 21:28:59 2007 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 13:28:59 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] One thing that worries me... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <93428765.20070201132859@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164475 Nicole: j> I don't know if I'm alone or not in thinking this, but I sometimes j> worry that J.K. might have caved in under pressure to write and finish j> this book quickly so that it could be published in 2007, and that as a j> result of this we will be left with a whole lot of plot holes... Dave: No, you're not alone. When they reported a few months ago on that incident Jo had at the airport, it sounded like she had a good amount of writing left to do. So I do have some concerns, though I have faith that she couldn't be pressured to compromise her story just to appease Time-Warner, and that they wouldn't be foolish enough to try. Nicole: j> ... and unanswered questions... Dave: Looking on the bright side, that might mean that the HPfGU community and discussions may long outlast the end of the series! Nicole: j> ... and maybe even an ending that is unsatisfactory. Dave: I doubt *that*, since we gather that the ending is already written. Nicole: j> PS: I'm so going to miss this series when it ends! Dave: Me too! But I'll bet she will be weaving us wonderful new tales in the future... Dave From twowaykid2525 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 19:59:41 2007 From: twowaykid2525 at yahoo.com (mitchell) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 19:59:41 -0000 Subject: One thing that worries me... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164476 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" wrote: > > I don't know if I'm alone or not in thinking this, but I sometimes > worry that J.K. might have caved in under pressure to write and finish > this book quickly so that it could be published in 2007, and that as a > result of this we will be left with a whole lot of plot holes and > unanswered questions and maybe even an ending that is unsatisfactory. > I think I'll be (almost) scared to read book 7! I hope that J.K. is > not an easy lady to influence... *sigh* > Nicole > PS: I'm so going to miss this series when it ends! > I don't think so...as with most writers, the ending is usually the most pressing to do, but also the most clear. Most writers have a VERY clear understanding at how they want their stories to begin and end. Though they might have a thousand and one revisions and ideas, the end is still clear. This indeed implies with J.K in my view. She already had the end of the 7th book written. I believe she took her time clearing things up and tweaking it here and there, but overall had a clear vision of how to end this book. The book that took the longest to write was OOP. Because its hard to find a perfect balance in the middle to fit with the start and end. OOP was a pivotal point in the series, and moved everything along. However with this book its the last one. No arguments or anything to follow. So I'm looking forward to read the "motions that have been in place for years". mitchell From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Feb 1 21:33:12 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 21:33:12 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164477 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kenneth Clark" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hpcentaur" > wrote: > > > > Harry Potter is not a horcrux because then it would be against > > JKR's religion (Christianity). In the real world if someone has > > a other soul in him then the person is possessed, by a demon for > > example. But if someone is possessed then the demon (other soul) > > takes control of the body where it is in. If Harry was possessed > > then don't you think that Voldemort would just take control of > > Harry without having to do a ritual to come back to life? > > > > > > Ken replies: > > "in the real world" there isn't such a thing as a soul (that anyone > has ever been able to find) and in any case it's just a story so even > if Rowling believes in souls it doesn't mean she has to toe the party > line in her fiction. Geoff: As a Christian, I would stongly disagree. There are various things about us as humans which cannot be "found" - in addition to our soul, our conscience and our thoughts. Yet we do not deny the existence of these two latter. Speaking from a Christian point of view, the Holy Spirit has been likened to the wind; we cannot see it, trap it in a bottle, paint it, eat it.... Yet we know experientially that it is there. The fact that JKR has said that it will be obvious by the end of the series that she is working from a Christian point of view suggests that she is keeping her faith in mind. A "party line" belongs to politics not faith. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Feb 1 22:59:37 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:59:37 -0000 Subject: We have a release date In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164478 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chez" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, doug rogers wrote: > > > > Geoff: > > It's also on BBC Ceefax news as well. > > > > So, since it isn't 07/07/07, it rather torpedoes one of the > > favourites of the "Sevens" > > conspiracy theorists... > > > > Doug: > > 21 is of course made up of three sevens. Geoff: Maybe but the fact it's 21/07/07 is merely because its a Saturday. Don't tell me JKR worked this out umpteen years ago.... > chezcreations: > Well as the one that posted the release date of 070707, I feel hurt....I wasn't a theorist, my girlfriend works for a bookstore in the US and that is the date that they had been given! Which apparently went unquestioned because she had said something about the number 7 being special or something to her....No theory fact! Obviously they told stores that so that they geared up and interestingly enough you are not only right about 3 x 7 =21 if you look at it that way but here is another 7 creeping in.....the expected release day was the 7th....now the 21st...exactly 14 days after the expected! Coincidence? I don't know!? Geoff: I'm rather amused because the "sevens" theorists are reminding me of Fudge and the "Daily Prophet" refusing to accept Voldemort's return and branding Dumbledore and Harry as lunatics in OOTP. :-)) If there's another 7 creeping in why not have 14/07/07 or 28/07/07? From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Feb 1 22:59:19 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:59:19 -0000 Subject: Christian Forgiveness and Snape (was Would Harry forgiving ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164479 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > So Dumbledore wasn't even considering what Harry's dead parents would have wanted for him--what parent could choose blood protection over love, warmth and real home? He's telling Harry he made a choice based on the information he had at the time and what *he* believed was right. And I believe he shut off his compassion for Harry to make that > choice, 'the twinkling light that usually shone from Dumbledore's > eyes seemed to have gone out', and attempted to replace it with > compassion for the WW. Pippin: Well in this case they're the same thing. You make it sound as if not preparing Harry to fight Voldemort would somehow have saved him from having to do it, and that's just not supported by canon. Haven't we seen enough of Voldemort's implacability to know that he would never have given up? What other choice did Dumbledore have, except the equivalent of hospice -- keep the patient comfortable and wait for the end? Many parents would choose otherwise. Would James and Lily let a premature Harry be stuck in an isolette, masked, taped with sensors, jabbed with needles, given poisonous drugs and oxygen that may produce permanent side effects such as blindness, in the fragile hope that it might keep him alive till he's strong enough to survive without them? I don't know. Dumbledore can't know. He can only do what seems right to him. But parents do make such choices. I'm one of them. We're not used to taking such drastic steps to stop a human killer as opposed to a physical one. But the principle is the same, IMO. Alla: Magpie, we are on the same page again, yes. But what I do not get is not only the argument that Dumbledore somehow gets a right of telling Harry about the dangers of being extremely pampered, after he stuck the kid with Dursleys, but also where exactly are the dangers for Harry to be pampered now? Suddenly after sixteen years Dursleys would start pampering him? Pippin: You saw how Dumbledore made them cower. You think Harry can't do that? Hasn't he thought about turning Dudley into something with feelers? Harry's already had a taste of what the magic words "Chosen One"did to Slughorn. He's already had Scrimgeour courting his favor. It might occur to him that the Ministry wouldn't dare take his wand away now. You think Harry can't have his head turned? Here's my latest Book Seven prediction, in honor of the release date announcement. Harry's pride will bring him to the edge of disaster. Snape's presentiments of James-ish behavior are going to turn out to be gilt-edged after all. Pippin From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 1 23:01:08 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 23:01:08 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: <11503346.1170349279744.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164480 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Personally I don't like the idea that an interest in sex is a mark > > of the immature but there you are. And of course, Ron's interest > > is always couched in comic terms. Whereas Harry is always more > > interested in personality than looks, bless him. (Um, unless of > > course it's a guy. > >>Bart: > This also emphasizes Harry's resistance to mind control. One must > assume that an Imperious Curse gives a LOT more pleasure than viewing > an attractive member of the gender with whom one would normally mate. > Betsy Hp: I can see that as far as Harry not being in thrall of some attractive person. And I think Carol was on to something when she suggested that Harry's resistance to Veelas had something to do with his resistance to Imperious. But it goes beyond that I think. Harry generally doesn't seem to even notice if a girl is attractive. Not even in passing. And that goes beyond a resistance towards mind control, IMO. For me it does suggest that Harry's a bit backwards in that arena. > >>Betsy Hp: > > Oh, I totally agree that the comedy of this moment was great. But it > > suggests that either Ron walks around with a giant bag over his head > > and cotton in his ears, or the Gryffindor boys (of any class present > > when either Ron or his brothers attended Hogwarts) have never > > considered raiding the girls' dorm. Which is not very realistic, > > IMO. (Nor is the fact that the girls haven't raided the boys dorm.) > >>montims: > I'm a Brit who went to an all-girls school, so I may be being dense > here, but why on earth would the girls raid the boys or vice versa? > We know they have house parties - in the common room - but I would > find it very rude (as in badmannered) to have fellow students coming > en masse into my sleeping area uninvited... If I am missing > something, please explain. Betsy Hp: Well, it's a raid so it's not meant to be polite. Generally the whole point is to run into the dorms and get everyone shrieking and dismayed and run back out again, possibly with underwear in hand as proof of mission accomplished. It's not a mature act by any means, and probably ranks right up there with tugging on pigtails. But as zgirnius mentioned, it's practically de rigueur for co-ed institutions here in the States. Interestingly, at my boarding school, this sort of thing would *never* have happened. They were pretty strict about boys and girls not going beyond the common room, and I think expulsions would have followed. (Though there was always the odd couple risking a sneak in through a window. Or at least rumors of same.) I kind of got the impression that loose behavior on the part of the school body might have gotten the school shut down. (Of course, this may have been our House Mom's attempt to keep us in line through fear. ) But seeing what all the Trio and the twins have gotten up to, the fact that Hermione is totally allowed to hang out in Harry's dorm, Hogwarts seems pretty loose about that whole thing. McGonagall is too far away to know if a girl has snuck into her boyfriend's bed and made judicious use of the bed curtains. Which again, speaks a bit to the lack of realism on this subject in the books. I don't begrudge JKR totally avoiding the subject (or mostly avoiding it anyway) but it does mean there's a disconnect, IMO, between Potterverse teenagers and real world teenagers. > >>zgirnius: > > But I think it is entirely possible the stair thing is not mentioned > by the older boys, so that Ron and Harry don't know. After all, it > must be funny for them to see younger boys not yet aware of the > problem get tripped up by it as well. Betsy Hp: I could possibly buy that... only that's a heck of a lot of discipline being shown by Ron's many older brothers. None of them mention the funny story around little Ron just for a possible laugh later? And if this were the case then I'd expect the older boys to set the younger ones up for a fall. "To get in the club you have to go fetch all the girls' hairbrushes by midnight tonight!", etc. No, I think JKR just preferred to avoid the whole messy issue. Betsy Hp From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk Thu Feb 1 23:06:19 2007 From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 23:06:19 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164481 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kenneth Clark" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hpcentaur" > wrote: > > > > Harry Potter is not a horcrux because then it would be against > > JKR's religion (Christianity). In the real world if someone has > > a other soul in him then the person is possessed, by a demon for > > example. But if someone is possessed then the demon (other soul) > > takes control of the body where it is in. If Harry was possessed > > then don't you think that Voldemort would just take control of > > Harry without having to do a ritual to come back to life? > > > > > > Ken replies: > > "in the real world" there isn't such a thing as a soul (that anyone > has ever been able to find) and in any case it's just a story so > even if Rowling believes in souls it doesn't mean she has to toe > the party line in her fiction. Pip!Squeak replies Well, Rowling is pretty clearly using the concept of souls in her fiction, so the argument of 'possession' is a reasonable one. If Harry was a Horcrux, he would contain one whole soul (his own) and a fragment of Voldemort's miserable little soul. So who would be in control? I'd go for the person with the soul entire. There are hints in Order of the Phoenix that Harry might be 'possessed' - odd flashes of rage at Dumbledore, stuff like that. But the essential Harry is able to overcome this eventually - even if he does shout rather a lot before he does. That fits with the idea that a whole soul can defeat one split into parts. I dunno; I think Voldemort was trying to use Harry's death to make a horcrux, the final horcrux, and that it's possible Harry is an accidental horcrux. But I think on the 21st July we're going to find that the biggest significance of the splitting of souls isn't 'where's the horcrux', but that Voldemort has weakened himself in a way he doesn't truly understand. Pip!Squeak From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 23:44:56 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 15:44:56 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: We have a release date In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702011544u66738748l78e6bb4f8217577@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164482 Geoff: > > It's also on BBC Ceefax news as well. > > > > So, since it isn't 07/07/07, it rather torpedoes one of the > > favourites of the "Sevens" > > conspiracy theorists... > > > > Doug: > > 21 is of course made up of three sevens. Geoff: Maybe but the fact it's 21/07/07 is merely because its a Saturday. Don't tell me JKR worked this out umpteen years ago.... > chezcreations: > Well as the one that posted the release date of 070707, I feel hurt....I wasn't a theorist, my girlfriend works for a bookstore in the US and that is the date that they had been given! Which apparently went unquestioned because she had said something about the number 7 being special or something to her....No theory fact! Obviously they told stores that so that they geared up and interestingly enough you are not only right about 3 x 7 =21 if you look at it that way but here is another 7 creeping in.....the expected release day was the 7th....now the 21st...exactly 14 days after the expected! Coincidence? I don't know!? Geoff: I'm rather amused because the "sevens" theorists are reminding me of Fudge and the "Daily Prophet" refusing to accept Voldemort's return and branding Dumbledore and Harry as lunatics in OOTP. :-)) If there's another 7 creeping in why not have 14/07/07 or 28/07/07 ======================================= Jeremiah I never believe anyone or anything until I read it on JKR's site. Period. End of story. Too many people enjoy coming up with witty and clever number games and then spout them out as fact (no, I'm not pointing any fingers or passive-aggressively nameing names). So, 21 is divisible by 3. I don't get the significance if the date if 7/21/07. Sure, it's the 7th book. Wouldn't it be lovely to have had a 7/7/7 release date... and that's probably something far too trite for JKR. I would have loved a release date on Harry's birthday. That would have been July 31st. I could have waited 10 days. In fact, I can still wait 10 days. If Harry dies in the final book (which I think is the case... JKR, please prove me wrong. Please!!!) Then it will be a sad birthday, indeed. However, if he lives... dunno. I'll probably go to ComiCon and have a great time. Now, as far as Barnew and Noble having a release date, I used to work for them. they'll take a release date from word of mouth and not a publisher just so they have something to tell their bratty customers. You know the ones. They're the ones who stand around and say, "What do you mean there isn't a date! That's rediculous. How can someone be publishing the most anticipated book EVER and you can't even get a friggin' release date." So, I neve trust anything I hear until it comes from JKR's site and I can read it myself... be it from her site or Mugglenet or Leaky Cauldron and always... ALWAYS... with screen captures. (Ever notice that those sites do a lot fo them?) Oh, and to rub it in for the "7" theorists... Do you think she'll cave in and do an 8th book to be released 8/8/08? Or would it be 8/8/88 for the never-finished-manuscript-that-was-just-discovered-in-her-basement? (Sorry for the crankyness...) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 00:13:01 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:13:01 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164483 --- "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Steve/bboyminn: > > > > Note that Harry has his character flaws that can be > > attributed to having been raised at the Dursley, but > > overal, that experience has made him the selfless, > > courageous, and compassionate person he is today. > > Alla: > > Sorry, but it can be said just as well that Harry is > the person he is despite being raised at the Dursleys, > not **because of that** IMO. > bboyminn: Perhaps my statement came across as more absolute than I intended. In a sense, I agree with you; Harry is who he is 'inspite of his life at the Dursleys' rather than because of it. That is, morally, Harry towers over the Dursleys, who for all their implied propriety, are sad sad miserable people. But I do believe buried in the misery of life at the Durley's, It is impossible for Harry to NOT learn valuable lessons from them. That experience has made Harry a better person than he might have been because Harry has a rational mind that can see through the clutter of class, implied status, and false prestige. We know that at times Harry has burned with jealousy as Dudley receive fabulous presents while Harry went without. Yet, Harry learns that real wealth is not in tokens. He doesn't value material things because he has seen the material things don't bring happiness. Every thing Dudley gets, he gets because he wanted, not because he needed or valued what he got. Quite the opposite, Dudley values nothing. Everything he got he broke, destroyed, or quickly grew bored of. Harry sees that possessions for possessions sake are worthless. Better to have one thing of true value than a million things of no value. That is a lesson well learned. Harry knows what it is like to be oppressed, so he has sympathy for the downtrodden like Neville. This also gives him the empathy that leads to his selflessness and willingness to sacrifice for others. Harry knows isolation and loneliness, this inhibits him from forming a lot of social friendships, but he does cherish the few close true friend he has. He knows well what a treasure they are. When Harry defends Ron against Draco on the train. I think this is exactly what we are seeing. Harry has made his first friend ever, and that is powerful and important stuff to Harry. Subconsiously, he is thinking that a friendship is powerful and deep. It is not to be bought and sold, or traded away lightly. It is something to be treasured. Ron in that first meeting with Harry seems totally sincere and honest; Draco on the other hand seems calculating and scheming. In the moment, Harry recognises the difference between Friend and friendly, and choses accordingly. So, you are right, if Harry had truly learned the lessons the Dursley's had intended to teach him, he would be one miserable excuse for a human being. But wisely, the Durleys became the negative role model for Harry. False pride, appearances, worthless tokens of wealth, are all the wrong things, and Harry clearly knew that. Whatever is right with the Dursley's is exactly what is wrong with the world. > Alla: > > .... as I said many times I wish JKR would have shown > blood protection in working. It would have been much > more convincing to me, ... bboyminn: I'm not 100% convinced we won't see the last vestiges of the Blood Protection. I can't imagine that there will not be an attempt on Harry at the Dursleys, and maybe, just maybe, the timing will be off enough to allow us to see the Protection in action. I know the chance is slim, but I won't give up hope until I've read the last page and closed the book. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 00:36:54 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:36:54 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164484 hpcentaurwrote: > > > > Harry Potter is not a horcrux because then it would be against JKR's religion (Christianity). In the real world if someone has a other soul in him then the person is possessed, by a demon for example. But if someone is possessed then the demon (other soul) takes control of the body where it is in. If Harry was possessed then don't you think that Voldemort would just take control of Harry without having to do a ritual to come back to life? > > > > > > Ken replies: > > "in the real world" there isn't such a thing as a soul (that anyone has ever been able to find) and in any case it's just a story so even if Rowling believes in souls it doesn't mean she has to toe the party line in her fiction. Carol adds: Nor is belief in possession "the party line" for all Christians. At a guess, it's one of the elements of the story that the Fundamentalists are railing *against." Belief in possession may be part of the Roman Catholic tradition (note that it's usually Catholic priests who exorcise the evil spirits in horror stories and films). Belief in the human soul is another matter altogether, and is a key component of all Christian denominations and many other religions, as well. JKR as a Christian (a Protestant but not a Fundamentalist) almost certainly believes in the soul, but I seriously doubt that she believes in possession, which is not part of RL for most readers, either. That does not mean, of course, that possession can't play a role in her books. Ginny is possessed on and off throughout CoS, and Harry is possessed briefly in OoP. Quirrell is, if not possessed, inhabited by Vapormort for almost the entire first book. But Horcruxes and possession aren't exactly the same thing. The Harry!Horcrux supporters (and I'm not one of them) aren't arguing that Harry is possessed by Voldemort's soul, the ragged remnant of which is now inside his own restored body. They're arguing that a *bit* or fragment of Voldemort's soul, split off by the murder of Harry's mother, entered the cut on his forehead and is now encased in the scar, much as a soul bit is deliberately encased in an object (or possibly a living creature like Nagini) to create a Horcrux. They think that a Horcrux can be created accidentally. Some, not all, of them think that the spell can be performed in advance (which still doesn't explain how the soul bit got into Harry, who surely wouldn't be an ideal container for the soul bit created from his own murder). At any rate, while I entirely agree with hpcentaur that Harry is not a Horcrux, I disagree that her religion has anything to do with it. I simply think that the arguments for an accidental Horcrux are unconvincing, that the powers in his scar can be otherwise explained, and that the whole concept would cause unnecessary plot complications in an already complex plot. Carol, doubting that anyone on the list thinks that Harry is possessed whether or not they think his scar is a Horcrux From BrwNeil at aol.com Fri Feb 2 00:42:17 2007 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 19:42:17 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: We have a release date Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164485 In a message dated 2/1/2007 6:48:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, hpfreakazoid at gmail.com writes: I never believe anyone or anything until I read it on JKR's site. Period. End of story. Too many people enjoy coming up with witty and clever number games and then spout them out as fact (no, I'm not pointing any fingers or passive-aggressivelpassive-aggressiv So, 21 is divisible by 3. I don't get the significance if the date if 7/21/07. Sure, it's the 7th book. Wouldn't it be lovely to have had a 7/7/7 release date... and that's probably something far too trite for JKR. Call them guesses or theories, it doesn't really matter . What counts is that the book is coming out. Usually you will get the correct answer if you follow the money trail. I doubt that the sales of book seven will be affected by it coming out a week after the release of movie 5. The opposite is not true. Depending on events that occur in book seven many people could potentially be turned off and not have an interest in seeing any more of the movies. Just a guess, but that is all most of the comments on this site are. Financially, it makes sense to let the movie come out first although I would have expected a longer gap between the two. The movie will help sell the book, the book might have unsold the movie. Neil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com Thu Feb 1 23:43:37 2007 From: cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com (Unspeakable) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 23:43:37 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164486 Hello all, Apologies if I'm going over old ground but I've been wondering recently about Snape's other greatest regrets (Loyal!Snape, that is!) and how they've been accumulating with each book... but in a way that is mostly unacknowledged in the text. No-one wonder Snape is so angst-ridden, he's indirectly responsible for quite a few catastrophes prior to HBP! PS/SS: Already Snape's bitter, childish jealously of Dumbledore's relationship with Harry (manifested in his spitting at the Quidditch match) seems to be warping his judgment. Snape ill-advisedly pursues his own investigation of Quirrell (though we assume Dumbledore had it covered) perhaps hoping to thwart him single-handedly and so regain DD's favour? As it is, Snape fails (despite his best efforts) to prevent Harry a) rushing into danger, b) nearly dying and c) defeating Quirrell and taking the credit. Add to that DD's public demonstration at the Leaving Feast and no one wonder Snape is determined to press for Harry's expulsion at the earliest possible opportunity next term! Question: might it have been different if Harry *had* known the answers to those Potions questions: reminding Snape forcibly of Lily instead of James? COS: Snape has his revenge by 'outing' Harry as a Parseltongue and potential Heir of Slytherin. In the end, this leads Harry to risk his life (again) in the Chamber of Secrets and to defeat Riddle (& Lockhart, which is a relief all round). But Snape must be worrying about Harry dying before he can discharge that life-debt... Question: does Snape suspect that Harry's scar is a Horcrux? POA: Well, the result of Snape *totally* losing it in the Shrieking Shack (Lily-died-despite-my-warning -because-James-trusted-you-Sirius!) is that the real culprit, Wormtail, escaped... to rejoin Voldemort. Sirius Black is (still) the Most Wanted, Remus Lupin is a disgraced werewolf and Fudge thinks that Dumbledore employs deranged staff. Nice one, Severus... still it's good to know you're (supposed to be) on our side! Question: did Lupin really think that Snape gave a **** about the Order of Merlin? GOF: This is the one I find *really* tragic. Moody-Crouch made one crucial mistake that should have been enough to unmask him as a Death Eater. Namely, his (completely false) claim that Dumbledore had authorized him to search Snape's Office, which betrayed a fundamental misunderstanding of Dumbledore's character. Snape was appalled and furious ? 'Dumbledore happens to trust me' (GOF25) ? brave words: but did he really believe it? Evidently not. When Crouch cleverly alluded to the Dark Mark - 'spots that don't come off' etc. - Snape was crushed. After that, he didn't dare put Dumbledore's trust to the test, for fear of being more bitterly hurt, IMHO. Thus when Crouch was given the Veritaserum - & confessed that '[Snape] found me in his office, I said I was under orders to search it' - this was almost certainly the first that Dumbledore had heard of the matter! Poor Snape. Now he *knows* it's all his fault (Cedric's murder and Voldemort's return). Question: if Snape wasn't in the Graveyard then where was he during the Third Task? (He's notably absent from the crowd, at least from Harry's POV.) OOtP: Now Snape's finally in a position to risk his neck spying for the Order... but his penchant for emotional mistakes continues (making him a steaming hypocrite, of course!). I'm not just referring to the Occlumency 'fiasco' ? but to the stupid taunting of Sirius Black, (which probably *did* make some contribution to the tragedy ? Harry knew his godfather pretty well, IMHO). This means that Snape's most significant role ? as the one who tried to persuade Sirius *not* to go to the Ministry on the fatal day ? is completely overlooked by Harry Potter. Question: does Snape *want* Harry to hate him? (Answer: probably yes, actually, if he blames himself for the Potters' deaths.) So all this together might help to explain why Snape isn't very good at the Patronus Charm... or at least disagreed with Harry 'on the best way to tackle dementors' (HBP21)? :-( Cassy V. (http://book7.co.uk/: evidence-based synopsis) From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Feb 2 01:18:00 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 20:18:00 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... References: Message-ID: <005401c74667$fb5a6690$e798400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164487 > bboyminn: > > Perhaps my statement came across as more absolute than > I intended. In a sense, I agree with you; Harry is who > he is 'inspite of his life at the Dursleys' rather than > because of it. That is, morally, Harry towers over the > Dursleys, who for all their implied propriety, are sad > sad miserable people. > > But I do believe buried in the misery of life at the > Durley's, It is impossible for Harry to NOT learn > valuable lessons from them. That experience has made > Harry a better person than he might have been because > Harry has a rational mind that can see through the > clutter of class, implied status, and false prestige. Magpie: But I think this is very kind of romanticized cause and effect some of us have a problem with (or at least that's my impression, I could be wrong about others). Living with the Dursleys really doesn't seem like a lesson that leads to Harry learning that material things aren't important or the meaning of true friendship. I also don't see Harry's problems with Draco as being and liking Ron as a big sign of how well his upbringing has served him. Draco's just not as much of a test as you're making him out. Harry hates Draco from the first time he suggests that he, like Dudley, is able to tyranize his parents' affections. He talks about outsiders and those that don't belong, and Harry automatically identifies with outsiders because he's always been one--and I can imagine him having the exact same reaction had he been raised by spoiled James, because that sort of thing just isn't liked by any of our main characters. There's just never a question of making any sort of close call about Draco for anybody or seeing the difference between Friend and friendly. Draco's not that smooth. Harry can't stand him. He never wants him as a friend. Draco's a shadow character from the first time he opens his mouth and might very well have been even if Harry had grown up with James (the guy who managed to make the same judgment about future DE Snape while growing up spoiled). Hermione makes the same judgments and also stands up for Neville. I can't connect that to the Dursleys as if this is the logical result of that in any significant way. What kid who reads the book doesn't get Draco is the snob Harry shouldn't like right off? Who needs ten years of that kind of treatment to identify these elements of Draco? In fact, why even make it that great of a thing--if Harry had grown up like Hermione perhaps he, like her, would dislike Draco in a more controlled way. So no, I just can't see the Dursleys as building Harry's reactions, nor do I see Harry's reactions as all that unusual. He's not, imo, passing subtle tests on these issues. They're not difficult and they're never presented as temptations. I doubt JKR would even be able to write them as temptations, they're so obviously repulsive to her. Harry from almost any alternative time line would have formed the same alliances. I think that's clear from looking at how Slytherin is presented--they're like a house of gargoyles separate from others. The challenge for our "good" characters, be they Harry (unwanted orphan), Ron (youngest son in a big loving family), James (spoiled rich boy) or Sirius (arrogant son of Purebloods) is, imo, to reconcile with that which they naturally reject, not be tested by the temptation of evil. -m From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Fri Feb 2 01:41:20 2007 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 20:41:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C914825FDD45CA-1620-5BFC@FWM-D32.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164488 Cassy V wrote: PS/SS: Already Snape's bitter, childish jealously of Dumbledore's relationship with Harry (manifested in his spitting at the Quidditch match) seems to be warping his judgment. Snape ill-advisedly pursues his own investigation of Quirrell (though we assume Dumbledore had it covered) perhaps hoping to thwart him single-handedly and so regain DD's favour? As it is, Snape fails (despite his best efforts) to prevent Harry a) rushing into danger, b) nearly dying and c) defeating Quirrell and taking the credit. Add to that DD's public demonstration at the Leaving Feast and no one wonder Snape is determined to press for Harry's expulsion at the earliest possible opportunity next term! Oryomai: Do we know that Dumbledore didn't ASK Severus to look at Quirrell? This is a point in the story where Harry gets little to no information on what is actually going on. He never asked if Severus was doing this on DD's orders. How is it Severus' fault that Harry goes after the Stone? Hagrid is the one who told Harry how to get past Fluffy -- why doesn't anyone want to rush to blame him for this? Cassy V: COS: Snape has his revenge by 'outing' Harry as a Parseltongue and potential Heir of Slytherin. In the end, this leads Harry to risk his life (again) in the Chamber of Secrets and to defeat Riddle (& Lockhart, which is a relief all round). But Snape must be worrying about Harry dying before he can discharge that life-debt... Oryomai: Do we know Severus knew Harry was a Parseltongue? This isn't something that he has told Ron or Hermione yet. I don't have my books with me, but I thought that Draco did that spell to be funny not because Severus knew anything. How can we expect Severus to know Harry's a Parseltongue when Harry himself doesn't tell anyone and doesn't actually know what one is? Cassy V: POA: Well, the result of Snape *totally* losing it in the Shrieking Shack (Lily-died-despite-my-warning -because-James-trusted-you-Sirius!) is that the real culprit, Wormtail, escaped... to rejoin Voldemort. Sirius Black is (still) the Most Wanted, Remus Lupin is a disgraced werewolf and Fudge thinks that Dumbledore employs deranged staff. Nice one, Severus... still it's good to know you're (supposed to be) on our side! Oryomai: Okay, so Severus lost it in the Shrieking Shack. As an occasionally rational person, what is he supposed to think? An escaped criminal from Azkaban has three students trapped in the Shrieking Shack. Severus does not know that Sirius is innocent at this point. Obviously he's happy that he gets to take down someone who tortured him, but Sirius was, at this point, a dangerous fugitive. Outing Remus was a petty thing for him to do, but we all have to admit that by not taking the Wolfsbane that night, Remus DID endanger alot of people. Cassy V: GOF: This is the one I find *really* tragic. Moody-Crouch made one crucial mistake that should have been enough to unmask him as a Death Eater. Namely, his (completely false) claim that Dumbledore had authorized him to search Snape's Office, which betrayed a fundamental misunderstanding of Dumbledore's character. Snape was appalled and furious ? 'Dumbledore happens to trust me' (GOF25) ? brave words: but did he really believe it? Evidently not. When Crouch cleverly alluded to the Dark Mark - 'spots that don't come off' etc. - Snape was crushed. After that, he didn't dare put Dumbledore's trust to the test, for fear of being more bitterly hurt, IMHO. Thus when Crouch was given the Veritaserum - & confessed that '[Snape] found me in his office, I said I was under orders to search it' - this was almost certainly the first that Dumbledore had heard of the matter! Poor Snape. Now he *knows* it's all his fault (Cedric's murder and Voldemort's return). Oryomai: Do we know that Severus didn't tell DD? Maybe he did and DD brushed him off -- like DD brushes everyone else off (IMO because he's an evil puppetmaster). Maybe DD told him that Moody was just suspicious or he said that he told Moody he could go wherever he wanted in the castle. I think it's wrong to say that the rebirth of Voldemort is Severus' fault -- what about DD who didn't see that Moody had changed? What about Wormtail who brought him back? What about Harry whose blood was used? What about Real!Moody who got captured? What about anyone else? Cassy V: OOtP: Now Snape's finally in a position to risk his neck spying for the Order... but his penchant for emotional mistakes continues (making him a steaming hypocrite, of course!). I'm not just referring to the Occlumency 'fiasco' ? but to the stupid taunting of Sirius Black, (which probably *did* make some contribution to the tragedy ? Harry knew his godfather pretty well, IMHO). This means that Snape's most significant role ? as the one who tried to persuade Sirius *not* to go to the Ministry on the fatal day ? is completely overlooked by Harry Potter. Oryomai: I don't think Sirius put muck stock into what Severus says at all. He hates Severus. Sirius was cooped up. Isn't that more DD's fault for not giving him anything to do? Severus didn't cause the death of Sirius -- he tried to get him to not go. Maybe Harry should've not given in to his "saving people thing" and did something useful for a change. I am not entirely sure what you are trying to do with this post. To me, it comes across as an attempt to blame Severus for things that he was not a part of. I am slightly aghast at your implication that Severus is responsible for the return of Voldemort and the death of Diggory. If there is something in your post that I am missing, I would be very happy if you could explain it to me. Severus is not the cause of everything bad that happens in Harry Potter. There are Bigger Bads out there than Severus Snape. Oryomai, who is very excited about DH and actually got in a Snape-related HP fight in History of Theater the other day (we were talking about School for Scandal, and the idea of liking mean people came up. My professor decided Snape was a good example!) _._,___ ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From va32h at comcast.net Fri Feb 2 02:31:34 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 02:31:34 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164489 Cassy writes: > PS/SS: > Question: might it have been different if Harry *had* known the > answers to those Potions questions: reminding Snape forcibly of Lily > instead of James? va32h here: How would it have been different if Snape had chosen not to single Harry out for abuse? Harry was merely taking notes in class, not ignoring Snape, something Snape had to know. But Snape also knew who Harry was and immediately began goading him. I agree that Snape was probably pursuing Quirrell of his own volition, as he was, in the first three books, eager to receive recognition. Cassy here: > COS: > Snape has his revenge by 'outing' Harry as a Parseltongue and > potential Heir of Slytherin. In the end, this leads Harry to risk his > life (again) in the Chamber of Secrets and to defeat Riddle (& > Lockhart, which is a relief all round). But Snape must be worrying > about Harry dying before he can discharge that life-debt... > > Question: does Snape suspect that Harry's scar is a Horcrux? va32h here: Does Snape even know that there are horcruxes? How would he have known before the duel that Harry was a Parseltongue? Cassy here: > POA: > Well, the result of Snape *totally* losing it in the Shrieking Shack > (Lily-died-despite-my-warning -because-James-trusted-you-Sirius!) is > that the real culprit, Wormtail, escaped... to rejoin Voldemort. > Sirius Black is (still) the Most Wanted, Remus Lupin is a disgraced > werewolf and Fudge thinks that Dumbledore employs deranged staff. Nice > one, Severus... still it's good to know you're (supposed to be) on our > side! > > Question: did Lupin really think that Snape gave a **** about the > Order of Merlin? va32h here: Oh I think Snape very much wanted that Order of Merlin. For the same reason he pursued Quirrell. His greatest achievment to date has been being a succesful spy - the very nature of this achievment is such that he will never get any public recognition for it. But here is a chance to be heroic *and* have it acknowledged. In the pre-return-of-Voldemort era, I think Snape believes he can put that whole DE/life debt/double agent business behind him. He's still acting like he has a future. Cassy here: > GOF: > This is the one I find *really* tragic. Moody-Crouch made one crucial > mistake that should have been enough to unmask him as a Death Eater. > Namely, his (completely false) claim that Dumbledore had authorized > him to search Snape's Office, which betrayed a fundamental > misunderstanding of Dumbledore's character. Snape was appalled and > furious ? 'Dumbledore happens to trust me' (GOF25) ? brave words: but > did he really believe it? Evidently not. va32h here: That's an interesting observation. I hadn't thought of Snape's feelings being hurt at that point. But it would have been as much in character for real Moody to search everyone's office and lie about it, wouldn't it? I do think GoF is the tragic turning point for Snape (among others) because Snape now realizes he must give up any pretense of an ordinary life. He will have to go back to playing spy again, and this time he knows exactly what the cost will be. I don't know where Snape was at the third task, but I don't find it particularly telling that Harry doesn't know. Harry wouldn't be looking for Snape at that point. Cassy here: > OOtP: > Now Snape's finally in a position to risk his neck spying for the > Order... but his penchant for emotional mistakes continues (making > him a steaming hypocrite, of course!). I'm not just referring tothe > Occlumency 'fiasco' ? but to the stupid taunting of Sirius Black, > (which probably *did* make some contribution to the tragedy ? Harry > knew his godfather pretty well, IMHO). This means that Snape's most > significant role ? as the one who tried to persuade Sirius *not* to >go to the Ministry on the fatal day ? is completely overlooked by >Harry Potter. va32h here: So it's a tragedy for Snape that his heroic effort to persuade Sirius not to go to the ministry has gone unnoticed? Hmmm. Not sure I understand that. I'm not sure that was Snape's most significant role either. Cassy: > Question: does Snape *want* Harry to hate him? (Answer: probably yes,actually, if he blames himself for the Potters' deaths.) va32h here: Probably yes because the idea of a grown man hating a little boy for no plausible reason is odious, even to Snape. He wants Harry to hate him so he will feel less guilty about hating a child who has done nothing to him. va32h, who does find Snape tragic, but not sympathetic From bawilson at citynet.net Fri Feb 2 02:43:57 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 21:43:57 -0500 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164490 JKR is telling a story, not doing a documentary. If any of that had been important to the story, she would have put it in. How far did Harry and Ginny go? She seems to at least want to give the other girls the impression that they went far enough for her to know what [if anything] was tattooed on his chest. And what of Ron and Lavender? Or Cho and Cedric? Or Draco and Pansy, for that matter? Just because JKR doesn't tell us that they went 'all the way' doesn't mean that it didn't happen. If you want to write a fanfic filling in the gaps, go right ahead. Post it on a suitable website and some of us may actually read it. Bruce Alan Wilson "The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bawilson at citynet.net Fri Feb 2 03:20:25 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 22:20:25 -0500 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164491 I'm sure that Mme. Pomfrey gives 'The Talk' to the girls. Who gives it to the boys? Bruce Alan Wilson "The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bawilson at citynet.net Fri Feb 2 03:31:07 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 22:31:07 -0500 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164492 Betsy Hp: "I don't know if JKR meant for it to come across this way, but it seems like the Gryffindors are the prudish house and the Slytherins the sensual house. It wouldn't surprise me if dirty pictures have made the rounds in the dungeons and wizarding versions of spin the bottle been played. But yeah, we're not going to hear about it. " It is ELEMENTary. Slytherin is the Water House and Gryffindor is the Fire House. Slytherins by nature are more sensual, as water is more sensual than fire. Of the two feminine houses, I'd imagine that you'd see a similar contrast between Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw. Look at the Heads. You can imagine Snape having a sex life--although the details are not something one would like to dwell on, particularly before dinner. McGonnagal seems like a steel-plated virgin to me; look at her name--MINERVA. Minerva, Diana, and Hestia were the three goddesses in Classical mythology over whom Venus had no power. Similarly contrast the dried-up little stick Flitwick--even if he was a dueling champion--with Pomona Sprout, both of whose names suggest fertility. JKR has said that some of the teachers are or have been married, but their spouses weren't relevant to the story so she didn't go into the details. Bruce Alan Wilson "The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Feb 2 03:46:34 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 03:46:34 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164493 Bruce: > I'm sure that Mme. Pomfrey gives 'The Talk' to the girls. Who gives it to the boys? Ceridwen: I've read fanfic that has Snape giving it to the boys. But I think that if this was so, especially if The Talk was given later than first year, we would have heard about it from Harry, simply because it would have involved Snape in an unpleasant and mandatory situation. Which makes me wonder, if Snape gave The Talk to all the boys, would he infer that most of them had no interest and the majority of the rest of them were dunderheads? I just can't imagine this scene being left out despite its subject matter! Ceridwen. From moosiemlo at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 05:50:24 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 21:50:24 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: One thing that worries me... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0702012150r42f77a3an90e3939321a4f960@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164494 Lynda: Here's an odd thing...just yesterday morning when I was talking with my mother I said, "I really think that JK Rowling will announce the release date for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. I mean, its obvious to me that the reason she announced the title last month (give or take a week or two) was that its actually closer to publication than she has let on, so I will be very surprised if she doesn't announce the release date in February." And then of course when I started checking my email tonight, the announcement was one of the first emails I ran across. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Feb 2 07:38:22 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 07:38:22 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164495 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Alan Wilson" wrote: > > I'm sure that Mme. Pomfrey gives 'The Talk' to the girls. Who gives it to the > boys? > Bruce Alan Wilson Geoff: Professor Binns possibly? :-)) From drednort at alphalink.com.au Fri Feb 2 07:55:21 2007 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:55:21 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: References: <11503346.1170349279744.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <45C38919.27319.25D4916@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 164496 On 1 Feb 2007 at 23:01, horridporrid03 wrote: > I don't begrudge JKR totally avoiding the subject (or mostly > avoiding > it anyway) but it does mean there's a disconnect, IMO, between > Potterverse teenagers and real world teenagers. *Some* real world teenagers perhaps - but certainly not all, and that's the point that I think may be being missed by some people here. It seems to me that some people seem to be acting on an assumption that the way *they* acted as teenagers, or that *they* see the teenagers around them acting is somehow the 'right' way for teenagers to act in that it is the way that all teenagers act. That simply isn't necessarily the case. It is certainly a *valid* way for teenagers to act, in terms that there are teenagers who act like that. It is a part of the continuum of 'normal behaviour' for teens. But it is one point on that continuum and you'll have some in act in ways on either sides of that continuum. I attended a boarding school in the 1990s and as I've said in a previous message, sexual behaviour (well at least sexual behaviour involving *other* people) really was not at all common. Very few people engaged in it. And we weren't odd. And we weren't abnormal. And we weren't failing to be normal teenagers. It's just that in our cultural environment, and our school environment, that type of behaviour wasn't a big deal. People *could* have had sex or sexual contact with others - there was opportunity. But it was rare because it didn't fit into the cultural context we lived in. Hogwarts may simply have that same type of cultural context operating. I'm not saying that it necessarily *has* to have that type of cultural context - merely that it is realistic that it *might* have that type of cultural context. And so I think it's unwise for people to dismiss Hogwarts as unrealistic simply because it doesn't represent the teen culture they are aware of - and I must say, especially so, when people are coming at it from quite a different cultural context. To *me* (and like anyone else, this may be partly because of the cultural environment I experienced as a teen) what I see as operating at Hogwarts seems entirely realistic. Sexual contact isn't non-existent (the scenes with the bushes at the Yule Ball) but it isn't all that common either. Less dramatic forms of romantic expression like kissing are a bit more common, but even those are nowhere near universal, nor are they automatically expected. All that, to me, seems entirely realistic, because it's what I lived with when I was a teen (-8 And I'm not going to claim it's the only way things *should* be, or even that it's necessarily common - but I certainly do believe it's every bit as 'normal' and 'realistic' as if they were going at it like rabbits. I actually had another point in writing this though - and that concerns Harry specifically. And the way he sees things like this and the idea that perhaps he's even 'advanced' in these areas than the norm. I think that is quite plausible and without going into details, I think I can maybe illustrate the way Harry *may* feel - by talking about the way *I* felt at his age. Personally I was a little 'slow' compared to my age peers in these things (although juding from what some people seem to expect us to have been doing, we were all slow!) and that happened for two reasons. The first is that I found it very hard to trust people as fully as I could have, because of abuse I'd suffered at the hands of other people. When that has happened to you, often it becomes much harder to open yourself to romantic contact with others, with the trust that that involves. And Harry - well, Harry, seems to have suffered worse than I did. So that wouldn't surprise me much at all. The other reason... I felt like there were more important things for me to be worried about that getting involved with girls. For me, the issue was my schoolwork and pressures on me to do well. And that had an effect. Again, though, the pressure Harry has to deal with, and the things *he* is expected to do make what I dealt with pale into comparison. This is a kid with the weight of his entire culture resting on his shoulders, who has had to repeatedly face the risk of death and to struggle to stay alive. Would it be all that surprising if maybe, just maybe, other things in his life seem a little less important to him? 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 drednort at alphalink.com.au Fri Feb 2 08:01:18 2007 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:01:18 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <45C38A7E.18768.262BD7E@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 164497 On 1 Feb 2007 at 22:20, Bruce Alan Wilson wrote: > I'm sure that Mme. Pomfrey gives 'The Talk' to the girls. Who gives > it to the > boys? Why not Madame Pomfrey? When I was at school, we certainly got lectures on this from our Matron - it was part of her job - she was the person with primary responsibility for our health and any aspect relating to our bodies. We were just expected to deal with that. It wasn't always her, sometimes it was a male member of staff - on one horrifying occasion, it was actually a Nun! There's no reason to expect that a school nurse, a school Matron wouldn't be entirely comfortable doing this if needed, and from my experience, she probably wouldn't care too much if the boys were comfortable or 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 From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 08:31:40 2007 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 08:31:40 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164498 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: Jen: ...what parent could choose blood protection over love, > > warmth and real home? Betsy Hp: > Um...me? This is the other side of the argument I really don't get. I can only assume that the assumption is that Harry wasn't in all that much danger. But if I were given the choice between a warm and loving home for a few years, then my son in Bellatrix's hands for a few hours, then death, I'd take the blood protection with the Dursley's thank you very much. Sure Harry suffered, but he's alive. **snip** > Betsy Hp Doddie here: I don't think DD realized how Harry would be treated...Also, given that cannon set forth that prior communication occurred between DD and Petunia...I often thought that part of said communication was that Petunia and Co. was not to simply shelter Harry...but ALL of the Potters, Harry, James, and Lily--and Petunia agreed! However Lilly and James died...and all she got on her door step was her orphaned nephew...(I think this may well explain much of Petunia's behavior towards Harry...Is petunia, perhaps like Snape, resentful that she was left with only Harry and not Lily..(sheesh everyone does seem to admire her so)..If this is, in fact what happened...can you imagine Petunia's resentment at never being able to lord the "powers of muggles" and "normal life" around her "witch/wizard" sister and brother- in-law.. Fact of the matter was that DD thought he had the difficult task of choosing between two "evils"...when actually his first instinct was correct....Harry should have been raised by Hagrid...(probably why we always see DD not paying mind to the headmasters portraits advice..) Hence Hagrid is the one chosen to introduce Harry into the WW..(making Hagrid, a half-giant, who is not allowed a wand legally, Harry's WW father...at least, this plan is successful... So who does Harry actually NEED to forgive? First of all, his parents: (They did not listen to DD as acutely as they should have/could have..) Perhaps DD offered up Snape(for the Potter's to stay at Spinners End) but Snape couldn't control his temper and Lily had reservations because she was tired of the stalking.. James however, saw that despite the life debt owed, Snape was the same B*NG H*LE that he always was..and of course James said, "no!". Harry of course forgave DD....he also forgave wormtail...so we may assume that he may have forgiven a great deal many between both.. Now, I may be wrong, but I believe that Harry may well go after Wormtail before Snape... DD From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 08:40:42 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 08:40:42 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death In-Reply-To: <005401c74667$fb5a6690$e798400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164499 --- "Magpie" wrote: > > > bboyminn: > > > > ... Harry is who > > he is 'inspite of his life at the Dursleys' rather > > than because of it. That is, morally, Harry towers > > over the Dursleys, ... > > > > But I do believe buried in the misery of life at the > > Durley's, it is impossible for Harry to NOT learn > > valuable lessons from them. That experience has made > > Harry a better person than he might have been because > > Harry has a rational mind that can see through the > > clutter of class, implied status, and false prestige. > > Magpie: > But I think this is very kind of romanticized cause and > effect some of us have a problem with .... > bboyminn: Agreed, I am overly romanticizing this aspect of Harry's life; downtrodden hero over coming adversity and all that. But I am doing this as a way of emphasizing an aspect of the story that I am trying to highlight. In general, I think Harry's life is far more tragic than romantic. > Magpie: > > Living with the Dursleys really doesn't seem like a > lesson that leads to Harry learning that material > things aren't important or the meaning of true > friendship. > bboyminn: Essentially, I am saying that Harry has a good BS detector and he is able to see the Dursleys for the frauds that they are. He learns lessons from the Durleys for sure, but the lessons he learn are not because of the Dursely, those lessons come from Harry's strength of character. Trust me I'm not trying to give the Dursleys any credit here. They are miserable people. I'm giving credit to Harry for having the character to see through their BS and understand how false and wrong they are. In a sense, by seeing, living, and feeling injustice, Harry very clearly feels and empathizes with injustice done to others. Again, that doesn't credit the Dursley, but does credit Harry with being far more morally and intellectually developed that they are. > Magpie: > > I also don't see Harry's problems with Draco as being > and liking Ron as a big sign of how well his upbringing > has served him. Draco's just not as much of a test as > you're making him out. Harry hates Draco from the first > time he suggests that he, like Dudley, ... bboyminn: Again, a slight misunderstanding, what I was saying was not about Harry's relationship with or reaction to Draco. It is about his relationship with and reaction to Ron. We are seeing Harry's BS detector in action, and it is no coincidence that Harry sees a bit of Dudley in Draco. > Magpie: > >... There's just never a question of making any sort > of close call about Draco for anybody or seeing the > difference between Friend and friendly. bboyminn: Agreed to a certain extent. But the aspect of the scene that I am referring to, is why Harry did what he did. Note my previous post - "Ron in that first meeting with Harry seems totally sincere and honest; Draco on the other hand seems calculating and scheming. In the moment, Harry recognises the difference between Friend and friendly, ..." If Draco has been a little smoother and more sensitive, Harry would have probably shook his hand out of common courtesy even if he didn't have a favorable impression of him. I suspect part of the result of living with the Dursleys is that Harry has learned not to make waves; smooth conflict free sailing is alway the best path. But once Draco insulted Ron, Harry was left with no choice. The easiest and safest way out of the conversation was to shake Draco's hand and be done with him, but Draco made it impossible to take that way out. Harry simply could not abide a 'Dudley-like' person insulting his only friend. Consequently, he soundly rejected Draco's offer of 'friendly aquaintanceship'. Note, I say "friendly aquaintanceship" because it is clear, at least to me, that Draco's offer is a political alliance and not true friendship. Calculating Draco certainly intended to benefit from his relationship with 'The Boy Who Lived'. Ron, on the other hand, was offerring straight up no-strings-attached friendship. Which choice do you think the Dursleys, especially Dudley, would have chosen. I'm confident, Dudley would have dropped Ron like a hot potato, and struck up an alliance that could do him some political and social good. The Drusleys are calculating in that way. > Magpie: > > ... if Harry had grown up with James .... Hermione > makes the same judgments and also stands up for Neville. > > I can't connect that to the Dursleys as if this is > the logical result of that in any significant way. ... > bboyminn: I'm not sure Harry would have the level of understanding that he currently has if he had grown up with James as an active father. I'm sure Harry would have grown up to be a fine boy, but I'm not sure he would have had the same sense of empathy for the outsider and the underdog. It is really impossible to say though, on one hand Lily and James seem like fine people who are well respected by all who knew them. But on the other hand, James seems to have an agrogance that comes from growing up priviledge. It is possible, that Harry would have had that same sense of entitlement, and that may have drawn him closer to Draco. Even so, I'm sure on some level Harry would have understood that Draco was a player, and would not have allowed himself to be /played/. But would he have felt and shown the same compassion for Neville or Luna? It's a tough call to make, but I think part of what allowed Harry to learn from the Dursleys is his own strength of character and moral sense of right and wrong. As I said, the Dursleys serve, in a sense, as an anti-model for life. If you want to see everything that is wrong with the modern world, just look at the Dursleys. In that sense, Harry learned from them, but he learned exactly the /opposite/ lessons they tried to teach him. So, while I believe that Harry certainly learned a lot from his experience at the Dursleys, the Dursley certainly deserve no credit for it. Harry learned a sense of justice by experiencing injustice and having the personal fortitude to see the difference. Harry learned the falseness of social status, by living with people whose who concept of social status was false. He learned the value and perspective of material things, by living with people who had absolutely NO perspective on material things. So, yes, Harry has gained personally by living with the Dursleys, but again, that gain comes from Harry's own strength of character, intuitive sense of justice, and his own fortitude and perseverance. The Dursleys were simply the anti-model that re-enforced all those aspects. I can see how Harry was hurt by living with the Dursleys. I see negative aspects of his personality that are common to people who grow up in situations like that. But I also see Harry's BS detector. As miserable and damaging as his life there was, he knew with certainty that he was right and they were wrong, and that knowledge carried him through. Yes, he learned and developed from living with the Dursleys but that credit all falls on him, not on them. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 12:33:32 2007 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 12:33:32 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164500 > va32h here: -- the idea of a grown man hating a little boy for > no plausible reason is odious, even to Snape. He wants Harry to hate > him so he will feel less guilty about hating a child who has done > nothing to him. Finwitch: Oh, I certainly agree. About Snape more-- I wonder if even Snape knows where his loyalties truly lie - with Dumbledore or Voldemort? Same, to me is in the evil-good line: Picture Voldemort in one end, Dumbledore on the other... In my view, Snape's exactly in the middle. Very shaky ground there -- really, even after he killed Dumbledore, we STILL don't know for sure which side he's on! Amazing. Still in the middle. As side note, I was all with Harry when he finally came up and said in his own words: - yes, Dumbledore, you trust him but I don't - because well, I have always felt that was something Dumbledore NEEDED to hear - and very badly so, from someone - anyone. I'm just glad Harry finally did it. Finwitch From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Feb 2 13:27:10 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 13:27:10 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164501 Pippin: > Well in this case they're the same thing. You make it sound as > if not preparing Harry to fight Voldemort would somehow have > saved him from having to do it, and that's just not supported by > canon. Haven't we seen enough of Voldemort's implacability to know > that he would never have given up? What other choice did Dumbledore > have, except the equivalent of hospice -- keep the patient > comfortable and wait for the end? Pippin: > Many parents would choose otherwise. Dumbledore can't know. > He can only do what seems right to him. But parents do make such > choices. I'm one of them. Jen: I was speaking more rhetorically to the fact that Dumbledore knew Harry would suffer at the Dursleys, that he was dooming him to 'ten dark and difficult years' and he decided to make the decision alone rather than ask someone what the Potters might have wanted or to 'condemn' Harry themselves. To do so would risk others saying 'no, we'll find another way' or having their compassion move them to reconsider once the immediate danger passed. Dumbledore believed at the time that compassion for Harry's suffering would cost Harry his life and that he alone might be capable of choosing with his head and not his heart. So the 'twinkling lights' going out of his eyes when he left Harry were meant to convey how a part of him died to make this choice. And that once he met Harry and started to have a relationship with him, that part of him resurrected and he succumbed to the 'flaw' of compassion. And in the end he is telling *himself* that he wasn't wrong to find his heart again when it came to Harry, 'I defy anyone who has watched you as I have--and I have watched you more closely than you have imagined--not to want to save you more pain than you have already suffered.' Magpie: > But it comes back to Dumbledore creating his own problems by > launching into his "If Sirius had been nicer to Kreacher it wouldn't > have happened and that's what we should do with House Elves" angle > in response to a throwaway angry line of Harry's. He decides he has > to defend Kreacher when Harry blames him for Sirius' death and hates > him for it. That's looking at his own responsibility instead > of saying what Sirius should have done. Jen: I don't think Dumbledore wanted to look at his own responsibility in that moment though, I think he was pretty angry with Sirius! And when Harry calls him on it, tells him how his words actually sound to Harry, 'SO SIRIUS ACTUALLY DESERVED WHAT HE GOT', Dumbledore starts to back off until, 'I was trying to keep Sirius alive', said Dumbledore quietly. And then he goes on to express an 'uncharacteristic sign of exhaustion, or sadness...' Right or wrong, Dumbledore is working out the events and his own feelings just as surely as Harry is. Objectively he should be able to put it aside and attend to Harry but he doesn't. I'm banking on JKR having the tight plot construction she professes to have and that Dumbledore in HBP is *not* the kinder, gentler Dumbledore due to JKR rewriting him for fans, rather that the speech is the necessary moment of Dumbledore's transition in Harry's eyes and his failures open the way for the more equitable relationship they share in HBP. I believe we might yet hear about other circumstances or failures that will shine a different light on Dumbledore's character and his choices. All that to say I probably agree with Magpie's comment: "Dumbledore's not being the perfectly sensitive person who says exactly what Harry needs to hear and makes him feel better--but that's okay. It's more interesting, probably, that he fumbles the ball here. JKR probably really prefers to keep Harry off-balance here, and not give him a soft moment of closure." Jen From puduhepa98 at aol.com Fri Feb 2 14:48:37 2007 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 09:48:37 EST Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164502 >Bart: >Hogwarts has students from 10-17. Doesn't ANYBODY have sex? Now, I am not one of those people who say that ALL teenagers have sex, but certainly, SOME do. Even the professors appear to be virgins! >And look at Draco. He clearly has little care for the feelings of others. Yet, he has a woman who has the entire older male student group hot under the, ummm, we'll call it the collar, and Draco has her under Imperious Curse, and, well, nothing! Don't tell me that Draco has become a gentleman! Any thoughts? Nikkalmati Part of the answer, of course, is that none of that is relevant to the plot and also it is a story for young children. But also, we live in an "anything goes" "whatever feels good" society. I remember back in the day when teen sex was much more rare, just because it was made so difficult to get together and adults felt that was part of their job (no I did not have a duenna). The kids at Hogwarts have communal living,a nightly curfew, and why do you suppose the teachers and Filch patrol the halls so frequently? We see from Snape rousting couples out of the bushes at the Yule Ball that it is not from lack of trying. I assume some couples are successful at getting together, but the situation and the teachers make it hard. Draco may not be the one who Imperiused Rosamerta, and, in any case, he can't get down to Hogsmeade any time he wants. He is under school restrictions too. As for the teachers, I have never read anything that makes me believe any of them are virgins. We don't see them in free time or on vacations and JKH even has said some of them may be married. That comment reminds me of teenagers' reactions at the suggestion anyone over 30 is having sex EWWW. They just don't consider it possible. Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 14:56:00 2007 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 14:56:00 -0000 Subject: The Irma/Eileen Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164503 va32h: > > Since there is already an existing motivation (which requires further > explanation, but at least the basis is there) for Snape to go through > this remorse/redemption process, why should JKR drop that, and > introduce an entirely new motivation that will have to be explained > from scratch? I'm asking rhetorically, not trying to be > confrontational. Finwitch: The life debt you mean? It HAS some prospect - I mean, Dumbledore told Harry that he'd be very glad for letting Pettigrew live - that Voldemort would not want a servant in debt of Harry Potter. What ever that's supposed to hint at. We also know - from Dumbledore - that Snape owed a life debt to James Potter. (and, failing to pay it off ended up protecting Harry?) What deep magic is at work here? THAT might be part of the secret - if there ever was one. (Dumbledore wouldn't need one if everyone else did, IMO. That's why he never got to tell it, either :-) .) Finwitch From puduhepa98 at aol.com Fri Feb 2 15:18:47 2007 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 10:18:47 EST Subject: Lupin and DD's Headmastership; (wasESE!McGonagall (not what you think)) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164504 >Carol >What happened, I think, is that the headmaster, Armando Dippet, died suddenly in December the asstant headmaster and Transfiguration teacher Albus Dumbledore took over the position, leaving the Transfiguration job open, so McGonagall, a Transfiguration whiz and registered Animagus, got the job. (I realize that this interpretation doesn't fit with Lupin's story of DD becoming headmaster just before he went to school, but it does fit with the HBP timeline for Tom Riddle's second DADA interview.) Nikkalmati This is an excellent suggestion to explain why McGonagall took over in December. I agree that it explains that part of the backstory very well. I have seen many posts discussing the supposed discrepancy between Lupin's bite and inability to go to Hogwarts, and the date of DD's becoming headmaster, but I think that is an illusion. Lupin does not really say DD became headmaster just before he came to Hogwarts. He merely says it was not until DD became headmaster that he was allowed to come to school. I think he is telescoping time they way we often do in conversation. Lets say Lupin was bitten at the age of 5, just about 1955, when DD became headmaster. His family would have assumed, based on past practice, that he could not go to Hogwarts, because no one yet would have been aware of DD's tendencies to allow everyone the same opportunities. They may not have been aware until Lupin received his letter from Hogwarts 6 years later that he would be invited, or, if they expected the invitation they were surprised when they discussed the situation with DD that he was willing to make "accommodations". Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Feb 2 15:21:07 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 10:21:07 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups]Professor Binns Message-ID: <30218141.1170429667561.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164505 From: Geoff Bannister >> I'm sure that Mme. Pomfrey gives 'The Talk' to the girls. Who gives it to the >> boys? > >> Bruce Alan Wilson > >Geoff: >Professor Binns possibly? >:-)) Bart: This reminds me of one aspect of the HP books that struck a nerve with me: Professor Binns and his history classes. Now, I don't know how history is taught in the U.K., but in the United States, because of various political pressures from both right and left, it is frequently taught as is illustrated by Professor Binns; in the dullest, most boring way possible. In addtion, it is usually altered to keep the personages from looking too, well, human (in either a good or bad way). A frequent whine heard from students before a history test is, "Do we have to memorize names and dates?", as if they are insiginficant. The fact that the question is asked at all shows that the history is being taught badly; as a series of unconnected events that lead to nowhere. In the United States, events like the Black Plague, the discovery of the Americas by Europe, and the Protestant Reformation, are taught disjointedly, the strong connections between them lost in a boring drone of names and dates. There's a saying, "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it." The frequent goblin revolts imply that the WW is not aware of this saying. I wonder if JKR is aware of this, and how it contributes to a view of the people running the WW as typical adults from a 1960's-1970's live action Disney movie (for those who remember, picture the late Joe Flynn playing Cornelius Fudge, and you'll see what I'm talking about). Bart From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 16:21:10 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 16:21:10 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164508 bboyminn wrote: > > In a sense, by seeing, living, and feeling injustice, > Harry very clearly feels and empathizes with injustice > done to others. Again, that doesn't credit the Dursley, > but does credit Harry with being far more morally > and intellectually developed that they are. > I'm not sure Harry would have the level of understanding > that he currently has if he had grown up with James as > an active father. I'm sure Harry would have grown up to > be a fine boy, but I'm not sure he would have had the > same sense of empathy for the outsider and the underdog. > > It is really impossible to say though, on one hand Lily > and James seem like fine people who are well respected > by all who knew them. But on the other hand, James seems > to have an agrogance that comes from growing up > priviledge. It is possible, that Harry would have had > that same sense of entitlement > So, yes, Harry has gained personally by living with the > Dursleys, but again, that gain comes from Harry's own > strength of character, intuitive sense of justice, and > his own fortitude and perseverance. The Dursleys were > simply the anti-model that re-enforced all those aspects. Carol responds: I agree to some extent. We can't know for sure, but growing up with James as a father might well have produced a boy rather like Draco but without the Dark wizard/DE father background and pureblood supremacy ideoology, or perhaps more like Zacharias Smith, whose father is described in HBP as "haughty-looking" (HBP Am. ed. 633). But growing up with James is immaterial. If James had lived (because the Prophecy wasn't revealed or the Secret Keeper was loyal), Lily would also have lived, and Harry wouldn't be the Prophecy Boy--no scar, no fame for a deed that wasn't even his own, no future as the nemesis of Voldemort. (Of course, the probability of any member of the Order--the Potters, Sirius Black, Remus Lupin, or anyone else, living long enough to get Harry into Hogwarts with an unvaporized Voldemort on the loose was slim to none, but that's immaterial, too.) We're not talking in this thread about normal Harry, Just!Harry with no powers other than his own and no premature fame for vaporizing a Dark Lord, the person he would have been if his parents had raised him, whether or not they indulged him as James's parents (according to a JKR interview) indulged him. We're talking about the Boy Who Lived, an orphan who needs to be raised by someone other than his parents because his parents are dead. The advantage of choosing the Dursleys, aside from the blood protection (which *of course* is the primary consideration) is that living with them (or Mrs. Figg, who unfortunately can't provide the blood protection) is that it removes Harry from contact with the WW except for a few wizards, whom I take to be Order members like Dedalus Diggle, shaking his hand or bowing to him in the street (which only confuses him rather than going to his head, as it surely would if he were living in the WW and regarded as a hero for something he didn't even do). The DEs don't know about Harry's Muggle relatives, and if they did find out through a traitor in the Order, they couldn't attack him because of the blood protection. In the WW, a boy with a scar on his forehead could not be safely hidden. Either he'd have to stay indoors, hardly a normal life, or he'd be pointed at everywhere he went. And he'd be hidden or pointed at because he was "special." So, without being raised by James, there was a good chance that he'd grow up thinking he had special abilities that he didn't have, that he was better than all the other wizard children, none of whom were worshipped as heroes from infancy. Instead, he reaches his eleventh birthday not only safe from the DEs, who have not figured out where he lives, but humble and innocent, viewing himself as Just!Harry. Granted, the Dursleys have not treated him kindly and I give them no credit for Harry's attitude, which, as Steve says, is a mark of his strength of character. But he does not see himself as some sort of superhero, either. Would an "arrogant little berk" like James Potter or Sirius Black have been a suitable future opponent of Voldemort? Could Berk!Harry have defeated Voldemort four times, from the age of eleven onward which IMo, he managed to do largely as the result of his own innocence and humility)? Considering that James died in battle with Voldemort at twenty-two and Black was sent to Azkaban, also at twenty-two, for rashly seeking revenge on the friend who betrayed him and James and Lily, I seriously doubt it. Neither their abilities nor their courage were enough, and their arrogance was not an asset. Harry's upbringing, bad as it is, has helped to shape him, to bring out his strengths in a way that a loving, indulgent family could not have done. He has not learned too much too soon. He did not come to school, like Severus Snape, knowing more hexes than most seventh years. He did not come to school, like Draco and Ron, knowing all about Quidditch and Hogwarts. He did not come to school full of his own fame, expecting to be worshipped as a hero, Lockhart-style, for something he didn't even do. He came to Hogwarts fresh from the Muggle world, so used to adversity that he thought nothing of it (like a kid born in a time before electricity and modern plumbing) that he thought nothing of it. Having grown up with Dudley and his gang, he had no fear of bullies and no respect for a boy who would try to bully his father into buying him a racing broom. Having slept in a broom cupboard full of spiders, he had no fear of them (unlike Ron, who grew up in a loving household but with mischievous older brothers). Living with the Dursleys might have shaped Harry into another Tom Riddle, but it didn't. It helped to make him who he is, a brave, resourceful, and compassionate. Dumbledore, of course, didn't anticipate these benefits. He didn't see the Dursleys (the HBP encounter shows that he's never met them before), and he didn't see them as McGonagall did and judge them (alas, a bit too harshly) as "the worst sort of Muggles." (If the Dursleys were as bad as it gets, the Muggle world would be lucky.) Instead, he assumes, perhaps naively, that they'll learn to love Harry and treat him well. After all, he's left them a letter. . . . He expects them to tell Harry who he is and what happened to his parents when he's old enough to understand. (In the meantime, I think DD would understand their giving him a cover story about a car accident. It would be extremely difficult for Harry to attend a Muggle school and live in the Muggle world if he thought of himself as a wizard, especially one who somehow vaporized a Dark wizard at the age of fifteen months. He *might* have turned into another Tom Riddle under those circumstances, and he'd certainly be regarded as delusional and dangerous if he mentioned his history and not-yet-developed powers to anyone.) BTW, I realize that DD says later that he knew he'd be condemning Harry to "ten dark and difficult years," but that's not the impression I get from SS/PS, twinkle or no twinkle. He seems to think that the Muggles will take good care of Harry, and he certainly see the advantages of keeping him out of the limelight. (He also, of course, knows about the blood protection and the presumed dangers of allowing Sirius Black to raise Harry. I think it's not just the DEs he's hiding Harry from. It's the supposedly traitorous godfather. But we don't know any of that because DD is hiding his primary motives from McGonagall and JKR is hiding them from us.) But in the HP books, actions have unintended consequences. Good comes out of evil (in this case, unintentional evil on DD's part) just as evil sometimes comes out of good (as when Harry prevents the killing or Wormtail, unintentionally allowing him to escape to Voldemort). The sacrifice of Lily Potter not only saves her son's life but gives Harry the powers he needs to defeat the Dark Lord. Snape's eavesdropping and Wormtail's betrayal result in a double murder, but one of those murders brings eleven years of peace to the WW. So it's not surprising that the Dursleys' mistreatment of Harry, in itself a bad thing, has good consequences, regardless of Dumbledore's intentions. Harry knows what adversity is (he can compare his own state with Dudley's), and consequently he can feel compassion for others who have little money and few comforts (the Weasleys and later, Sirius Black living on rats in a cave). He can feel compassion for Buckbeak, unfairly sentenced to death (and for Hagrid, grieving over the impending execution) and for Sirius Black, a man imprisoned for a murder he didn't commit (however much he wanted to). He can empathize (eventually) with Neville and other victims of the Dark Lord. He can stand up to Snape, and later to Umbridge and Rufus Scrimgeour, because he's learned to stand up to Uncle Vernon. Carol, who knows from experience that adversity can build character or destroy it, and who thinks that Harry's reaction to it has helped to shape him into the person he needs to be to defeat Voldemort (with no such intention on Dumbledore's part and no credit whatever to the Dursleys) From jnferr at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 17:07:08 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 11:07:08 -0600 Subject: Snape's memory Message-ID: <8ee758b40702020907t5f7f855du419db114782dd8fc@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164509 va32h (in another thread): > > From Snape's memories, as seen by Harry, it appears that Snape > resembles his father, in terms of the hooked nose, at least. The > mother in that memory is not described as having a hooked nose. I > don't think her nose is described at all, actually. But it's the > mention of the man's hooked nose that is supposed to be our clue that > Snape is recalling his parents, isn't it? > montims: I am not convinced that that is the case - I believe Jo is hoodwinking us - in very quick succession, we see the crying boy, the flyshooter, the unsuccessful rider, and we assume in each case that they are Snape, and that they are in chronological order. Harry doesn't say whether or not he recognises any of the characters, only that they were not his memories. We assume he identifies Snape. It happens so quickly, then stops with "Enough!" and we don't go back to analyse the images. I believe that the shouting man was Snape. We don't know who the cowering woman or the crying boy are, or why they are cowering/crying. It has been speculated that Snape is shouting at his wife, and the boy is his son. I'm not sure I believe that, but I am convinced that the scene is important... It could even be Petunia and Harry, for all we can tell from the memory... (farfetched theory just to prove the point..) From va32h at comcast.net Fri Feb 2 17:36:55 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 17:36:55 -0000 Subject: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702020907t5f7f855du419db114782dd8fc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164510 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Janette wrote: > I believe that the shouting man was Snape. We don't know who the > cowering woman or the crying boy are, or why they are cowering/crying. > It has been speculated that Snape is shouting at his wife, and the > boy is his son. I'm not sure I believe that, but I am convinced that > the scene is important... It could even be Petunia and Harry, for all > we can tell from the memory... (farfetched theory just to prove the > point..) > va32h here: I cannot imagine that Harry would miss seeing his own Aunt Petunia in Snape's memory. I do like the idea that the man is Snape's grandfather, not father (forgot who here mentioned that, sorry!). But I see no purpose for JKR to throw in a wife and child for Snape at this point in the story. JKR has alluded to the idea that while Snape was loved by someone, he himself has never loved anyone. So Snape would have a wife and child he didn't love. How is that supposed to make us feel sympathy for Snape? And we already have plenty of reasons to loathe Snape, do we need any more? va32h From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 17:39:12 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 09:39:12 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: We have a release date In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702020939q5e08ba40ybf7c8625fa7843fa@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164511 Call them guesses or theories, it doesn't really matter . What counts is that the book is coming out. Usually you will get the correct answer if you follow the money trail. I doubt that the sales of book seven will be affected by it coming out a week after the release of movie 5. The opposite is not true. Depending on events that occur in book seven many people could potentially be turned off and not have an interest in seeing any more of the movies. Just a guess, but that is all most of the comments on this site are. Financially, it makes sense to let the movie come out first although I would have expected a longer gap between the two. The movie will help sell the book, the book might have unsold the movie. Neil ======================================= Jeremiah: Neil wrote: "What counts is that the book is coming out." jeremiah: YES! "hmm hmm hmm ... Humming to myself... hmm hmm hmm.... happy, happy book release....la, la, laaaaaa... la, la, laaaaaa" Absolutely. In fact, it may still effect future movies to a degree. If Harry is dead at the end of DH then there will be readers who won't want to see it on the screen. It is true that there would be an adverse effect if DH were to be released before OotP debuts. bu, keeping with the "release date" thingy... There is another board that has HP posts and some guy said that July 21 was significant because that was the release date for PP/SS. Not true, but very, very close, Amazon.co.uk has posted the origional release date as July 26, 1997. (ok, I'm American and even though I'm talking about a UK site I still am compelled to use the American system for writing dates. LOL). So, the date: is it really about the money? I don't know. I think she could have released the book the same weekend and there would have been an inner battle with fans that would go something like: "Stand in line and buy the book or stand in line to see the movie... movie, book, movie, book. Why can't they have a 2 am showing! Oh, the turmoil!" Well, that's the scene in my head. I do, however thin that there was a mid-summer relase "concept" which would play to students and adluts going on vacation for the summer. I also think it plays to the movie and won't bump the hype but heighten it. And I remember that HBP was released the same weekend as ComicCon... since I had the book mailed to me I had a good night's rest while others who pulled an all-nighter were cranked on caffein and walking around like twithy zombies mumbling things like "bezoars are cool" and "Ginny... heh heh... Ginny and Harry... heh heh..." It made for avaer interresting Con. But I'm sure that Sectus and ComiCon have nothing to do with a publisher's date. While a ton of fans will be effectd it is in a smaller geographic region and as much as I'd love to go to Sectus I truely can't afford it. So, I would htink it's not a major factor to the release date. Same with ComicCon, however, Scholastic (the US publisher) had a small booth but soem rockin' freebies... Plus some pretty keen bookmarks. Did anyone go to that Con who can recall if there was a midnight release at the site? I want to say there was but I can't remember. I do know they raffled off free copies of the book. Anyhoo... I hope they have cool stuff this year seeing as ComicCon is the weekend after the release. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From elfundeb at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 17:56:15 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:56:15 -0500 Subject: ADMIN: DH Release Date: What's On- and Off-Topic Message-ID: <80f25c3a0702020956o2d8e2e1asfdad8e1b24eca240@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164512 Greetings from Hexquarters! We are all extremely excited to learn that the publication date for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is less than six months away! So excited, in fact, that the elves agreed that it wouldn't greatly offend our posting rules to allow the news to be spread on this list. ;-) However, now that the news is a full day old, we want to remind everyone that discussions of the publication date need to conform to posting rules: * If your post discusses what will happen -- the characters, the plot or any other information about the books themselves, including predictions about the likely outcome of the series and reader reaction to that outcome -- please post it on this list. * If your post discusses how you will obtain your copy, how fast you will read it, whether you intend to peek at the last page or the table of contents, how the release date will affect upcoming HP conferences or box office receipts for the OOP film, great ideas for release parties, and the effect of the end of the series on your life or this list, please post it on the OT-Chatter list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter * Please try **not** to send any messages about the release date alone. One-line and me-too posts are strongly discouraged on the list; make each post count! If you have any questions about your post, please contact us at: hpforgrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com (without the spaces). Thanks for your cooperation! Speedy Elf for the List Elves [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 18:00:31 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:00:31 -0000 Subject: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164513 > va32h here: > > I cannot imagine that Harry would miss seeing his own Aunt Petunia in > Snape's memory. > > I do like the idea that the man is Snape's grandfather, not father > (forgot who here mentioned that, sorry!). But I see no purpose for JKR > to throw in a wife and child for Snape at this point in the story. > > JKR has alluded to the idea that while Snape was loved by someone, he > himself has never loved anyone. zgirnius: This is not what Rowling said. She said Snape has been loved, but she has never denied that he, in turn, may have loved someone. > WBUR Interview, 1999: > Lydon: Er - one of our connec- ... one of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love? > JKR: Yeah? Who on earth would want Snape in love with them, that is a very horrible idea. Erm ... > Lydon: But you'd get an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape > JKR: It is, isn't it ... I got ... There's so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't because it'd ruin ... I promise you ... whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I'm - I'm slightly stunned that you've said that - erm - and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read book 7. And that's all I'm going to say. > Lydon: Mmmm - this is - this is encouraging. zgirnius: To me, this quote does not rule out a backstory of Snape having been in love. If anything, it suggests such a surprise may be planned. The he has been loved statement was in a 2006 interview just after the publication of HBP - she was contrasting him to Voldmeort, who has not been loved. From jnferr at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 18:10:22 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:10:22 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: References: <8ee758b40702020907t5f7f855du419db114782dd8fc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40702021010w26d45082h2dd89fbd205cde74@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164514 montims wrote: > > I believe that the shouting man was Snape. We don't know who the > > cowering woman or the crying boy are, or why they are cowering/crying. > > It has been speculated that Snape is shouting at his wife, and the > > boy is his son. I'm not sure I believe that, but I am convinced that > > the scene is important... It could even be Petunia and Harry, for all > > we can tell from the memory... (farfetched theory just to prove the > > point..) > > > > va32h here: > > I cannot imagine that Harry would miss seeing his own Aunt Petunia in > Snape's memory. > > I do like the idea that the man is Snape's grandfather, not father > (forgot who here mentioned that, sorry!). But I see no purpose for JKR > to throw in a wife and child for Snape at this point in the story. montims: If it were Petunia, Harry may have recognised her - none of the characters are identified by him because of the sequence of events, was my point. However, I don't believe it was Petunia or his possible wife, but I do believe that it was Snape shouting at a cowering woman while a boy cried. And I think this will come into DH. From mueckelein at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 18:03:23 2007 From: mueckelein at yahoo.com (mueckelein) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:03:23 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164515 Carol: > But Horcruxes and possession aren't exactly the same thing. The > Harry!Horcrux supporters (and I'm not one of them) aren't arguing > that Harry is possessed by Voldemort's soul, the ragged remnant of > which is now inside his own restored body. They're arguing that a > *bit* or fragment of Voldemort's soul, split off by the murder of > Harry's mother, entered the cut on his forehead and is now encased > in the scar, much as a soul bit is deliberately encased in an > object (or possibly a living creature like Nagini) to create a > Horcrux. They think that a Horcrux can be created accidentally. > Some, not all, of them think that the spell can be performed in > advance (which still doesn't explain how the soul bit got into > Harry, who surely wouldn't be an ideal container for the soul bit > created from his own murder). mueckelein: Hi, Carol, I am one of those who think that Harry WAS a Horcrux. At the end of GoF Voldemort took it back again! That?s what he needed Harry?s blood for. I think that Harry never faced the Avada Kedavra. He was made a Horcrux by Voldemort on purpose. Horcruxes definately do not happen accidently. A spell must be said according to Slughorn's information. And I do not think that Voldemort sings the spell along for fun....He made Harry a Horcrux to make Harry?s life dependent on his. If Harry is killed, he will be dead, but only a seventh of Voldemort?s soul will be gone. Harry was Voldemort?s guarantee for life - at least it was planned that way by Voldemort. But the plan went wrong: Voldemort had split his soul too often and lost his power. To get it back he had to take back this part of soul. That explains why Voldemort never really tried to kill Harry before the end of GoF. He murdered Cedric so easily, why didn?t he do the same with Harry if not for a certain purpose?! He needed Harry alive. At the instant he gained back his powers he tries to kill Harry because he knows the prophecy. From k12listmomma at comcast.net Fri Feb 2 17:41:52 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 10:41:52 -0700 Subject: Rowlings celebrates the finishing of Book 7 References: <30218141.1170429667561.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <010701c746f1$6cdfafd0$c0affea9@MOBILE> No: HPFGUIDX 164516 copying this from another list: HARRY POTTER author J.K. ROWLING finished writing the final book in the fantasy franchise three weeks ago - and marked the occasion by leaving graffiti in a Scottish hotel. Eagle-eyed guests at the five-star Balmoral Hotel spotted a line from the best-selling author scrawled in black pen on the back of a marble bust in a room Rowling occupied. She wrote, "J.K. Rowling finished writing Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows in this room (652) on 11th Jan 2007." Rowling yesterday revealed the book, the seventh in the series, will be released on 21 July (07). URL to article: http://contactmusic.com/news.nsf/article/rowling%20marks%20final%20potter%20moment_1020893 Shelley From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Feb 2 18:57:00 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:57:00 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164517 > > Jen: I was speaking more rhetorically to the fact that Dumbledore > knew Harry would suffer at the Dursleys, that he was dooming him > to 'ten dark and difficult years' and he decided to make the decision > alone rather than ask someone what the Potters might have wanted or > to 'condemn' Harry themselves. To do so would risk others > saying 'no, we'll find another way' or having their compassion move > them to reconsider once the immediate danger passed. Dumbledore > believed at the time that compassion for Harry's suffering would cost > Harry his life and that he alone might be capable of choosing with > his head and not his heart. Pippin: I'm not sure where this is coming from. The Potters *died* to keep Harry alive. I think that's a pretty strong statement of their wishes. Who would Dumbledore think they'd want him to ask? Sirius, who at the very least must have inadvertently betrayed the Potters' whereabouts? Lupin? Where the heck was he anyway? Some committee of ministry do gooders? James and Lily were members of the Order, clearly they didn't trust the ministry to fight Voldemort for them. In any case, the immediate danger was never past -- suppose the Weasleys had won the galleon draw ten years earlier? Or that someone like Quirrell had wandered into Albania sooner than Quirrell did? The danger of Voldemort might fade from people's consciousness, but the danger itself still existed. The blood protection would not fail through complacency, nor could it be hoodwinked or blackmailed or jinxed, at least as long as wizards could be kept from contact with the Dursleys. The light in Dumbledore's eyes usually shows itself when he's amused or pleased about something. Of course he wouldn't be pleased about having to leave Harry at the Dursleys. But it seems like a leap to say that his compassion for Harry's suffering had to die so that he could do such a thing. I think his heart was aching, but it would be a poor return for James and Lily's sacrifice if he let their son be murdered to salve his own feelings. Dumbledore did say that he feared what would happen if he cared about Harry too much -- but that was about Voldemort trying to use Harry as a spy against him, and about Dumbledore's failure to explain to Harry why Voldemort wanted him dead. It was not about Harry staying at the Dursleys, which continues even after Dumbledore has admitted that he does care about Harry. This whole too much thing is again part of that older culture that says feelings aren't to be trusted. And Dumbledore is struggling with that, working his way to the idea that his love for Harry was not a mistake, or if so it was a felix culpa. (OOP is the book of 'felix culpa', Dumbledore even refers to it when he says a "lucky mistake" brought him to Harry's hearing on time.) But it's not as if Dumbledore had a choice between Petunia and some other relative of Lily's who could have provided a nurturing home. If Rowling wanted Dumbledore's choice to be about that, about Dumbledore deciding that nurture would be bad for Harry, she could easily have created such a relative, (Mark Evans, anyone?) but she didn't. Dumbledore feels very strongly that pampering would be bad for Harry, but I think it's a misunderstanding to equate pampering with nurture and love. Doing so is so far from Dumbledore's thinking that I'm sure he feels he doesn't need to explain the difference -- leaving his readers just where Rowling wants them, ie thinking about it. "SIRIUS DESERVED WHAT HE GOT" is the same, IMO, so far from Dumbledore's thinking that it didn't occur to him that his words would sound that way to Harry, just as he didn't expect Harry to put so much weight on the prophecy. Dumbledore is at fault if he forgets how youth thinks and feels, since he was young once, but Harry is also a product of a culture which Dumbledore never experienced and which he can never fully understand. Naturally this creates a wealth of misunderstandings, a source of confusion which Rowling finds fruitful. Pippin From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 19:13:17 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:13:17 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164519 > >>bboyminn: > Essentially, I am saying that Harry has a good BS > detector and he is able to see the Dursleys for the > frauds that they are. > Betsy Hp: Really? I don't think Harry's BS detector is all that great actually. Sure he can spot the Dursleys as being bad eggs, but really, who couldn't? They're mean to him, therefore they suck. Where's the challenge? But Harry does fall for Fake!Moody's suck ups. He mistrusts Cedric because of romantic jealousy. He turns on Seamus for questioning him, etc., etc. Harry's head is easily turned for a while by those who praise him, and he distrusts and dislikes those who are mean to him (remember, Draco said just about all the wrong things when talking to Harry in the robe shop). That doesn't strike me as particularly good BS detection. Fairly standard, if not a bit sub- par, IMO. > >>bboyminn: > I'm not sure Harry would have the level of understanding > that he currently has if he had grown up with James as > an active father. I'm sure Harry would have grown up to > be a fine boy, but I'm not sure he would have had the > same sense of empathy for the outsider and the underdog. > > But would he have felt and shown the same compassion for > Neville or Luna? > Betsy Hp: But Harry *doesn't* have a lot of compassion for Neville, or even Luna for a while there. He sees Neville as fairly pathetic and tries to not hang out with him if he can avoid it up until I believe the HBP train scene. I know there's this great fanon myth that Neville is Harry's second best male bud, but I think that developed because we fans like Neville so much. And it overlooks Harry's sad and rather transparent efforts to lose Neville in PoA (The hunchback witch chapter, IIRC), and his embarrasement to be seen sitting with Neville in OotP. Harry's also not too thrilled to be seen with Luna and is horrified to think they might have something in common. It's not until HBP that Harry finally feels okay hanging around both Neville and Luna. Honestly, Harry's very insularism is a great weakness (the D.A. fell apart in part because Harry himself saw no worth in keeping it together) that I think the Dursleys can be blamed for. So I think the Dursleys may have actually *weakened* Harry's abilities to fight Voldemort. He can't even pull his fellow Gryffindor class together (Dean and Seamus were neither great friends of Harry by the end of HBP). How is he going to follow the Sorting Hat's advice and pull together the four houses? (I mean he will, obviously, but it'll be difficult. ) Betsy Hp From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 19:12:16 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:12:16 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164520 ?? Pippin: > I'm not sure where this is coming from. The Potters *died* to > keep Harry alive. I think that's a pretty strong statement of > their wishes. Who would Dumbledore think they'd want > him to ask? > > Sirius, who at the very least must have inadvertently > betrayed the Potters' whereabouts? > Alla: Considering the fact that he was named by Potters as their son's guardian, I would say yes. All that was needed for Dumbledore in PoA to find out the truth was **one** talk with Sirius, just one. Pippin: Lupin? Where the heck was he anyway? Alla: Of course Lupin was with Voldemort and after helping him murder Lily and James and being surprised by his master's disappearance, he just went to torture Longbottoms with Bella and Co. :) So, agreed here - no asking Lupin. Pippin: > Dumbledore feels very strongly that pampering would be > bad for Harry, but I think it's a misunderstanding to equate > pampering with nurture and love. Doing so is so far > from Dumbledore's thinking that I'm sure he feels he > doesn't need to explain the difference -- leaving his > readers just where Rowling wants them, ie thinking about it. Alla: Well, to this reader Dumbledore in this speech of his comes out precisely as equating pampering with nurture and love and then having a nerve to say that it is bad for Harry. Alla, who wishes that JKR never felt a need to defend Dumbledore to the readers ( because yes, this is how I see the main reason for that speech), but that to me only confirms that she **really** wants us to see the certain Dumbledore and if we do not see it, the speech like that comes along. In my speculative opinion of course. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 19:22:20 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:22:20 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164521 Cassy wrote: > Apologies if I'm going over old ground but I've been wondering recently about Snape's other greatest regrets (Loyal!Snape, that is!) and how they've been accumulating with each book... but in a way that is mostly unacknowledged in the text. No-one wonder Snape is so angst-ridden, he's indirectly responsible for quite a few catastrophes prior to HBP! Carol responds: I've come back to the original post because I don't agree with any of the previous responses. Needless to say, I don't agree with this reading of DDM!Snape, either. > Cassy: > PS/SS: > Already Snape's bitter, childish jealously of Dumbledore's relationship with Harry (manifested in his spitting at the Quidditch match) seems to be warping his judgment. Snape ill-advisedly pursues his own investigation of Quirrell (though we assume Dumbledore had it covered) perhaps hoping to thwart him single-handedly and so regain DD's favour? As it is, Snape fails (despite his best efforts) to prevent Harry a) rushing into danger, b) nearly dying and c) defeating Quirrell and taking the credit. Add to that DD's public demonstration at the Leaving Feast and no one wonder Snape is determined to press for Harry's expulsion at the earliest possible opportunity next term! Carol responds: You're assuming a great deal here, including Snape's jealousy of Harry's relationship with Dumbledore and his resentment of the points awarded to Gryffindor (which I can certainly see the Slytherin *students* resenting) at the last minute. The story is told from Harry's very limited point of view, and we have no idea what went on between Snape and Dumbledore. (DD's explanation of Snape's behavior based on the life debt to Harry's father has always struck me as one of DD's half-truth partial explanations--what Harry needs to know or can safely be told. He's certainly not going to tell Harry that Snape is his chief anti-Voldemort agent at Hogwarts.) Nor do we know how much Snape knew or what his motivation was since his explanations at Spinner's End are geared to a DE audience. We know that he suspected Quirrell of trying to steal the stone and tried to thwart him (failing because he didn't know how to get past Fluffy and because the plot required him to be the red herring villain). He was not trying to stop Harry in order to "steal his glory." Nor could he have suspected that Harry was trying to stop *him* from going after the stone. At this point, Snape doesn't seem to know about the Invisibility Cloak, so I don't see how he could have stopped three kids from unwisely entering the corridor. And if he couldn't get past the three-headed dog, he wouldn't expect them to do so, either. I see no glory-seeking here, only an attempt to stop Quirrell. (It would have been better, BTW, if Harry hadn't tried to stop him. Quirrell!mort would have been thwarted by the mirror. But then Harry and his friends wouldn't have had their dangerous adventure and there would be no story.) I'm not at all sure, BTW, that Snape is determined to expel Harry next term or ever. IMO, he's just using scare tactics to enforce the rules. He knows perfectly well that he's not Harry's HoH and that the authority to expel Harry is not his, and when he finally catches Harry quite literally red-handed, splattered with Draco's blood in HBP, he never argues for Harry's expulsion, instead giving him multiple detentions (presumably to keep him from making another such mistake). > Cassy: > Question: might it have been different if Harry *had* known the answers to those Potions questions: reminding Snape forcibly of Lily instead of James? Carol: Again, you're assuming. We don't *know* that there's a Lily/Snape connection. We have only one moment of contact between Snape and Lily in the books, and it's not a pleasant one. He never speaks of her, and the absence of evidence of any emotional connection to Lily, in marked contrast to his anger toward the arrogant James, is interesting but not in itself evidence that he views Lily as important. (Even if Lily was as good at Potions as Slughorn remembers her as being, that doesn't mean she was a potions genius like Severus or that she ever saw his Potions textbook. Good-at-Potions Lily simply misleads Slughorn into thinking that Harry is actually coming up with his own potions improvements. IMO, she's a plot device, as is Cheeky!Lily whose eyes Slughorn remembers so fondly that he provides the real memory to Harry out of drunken remorse.) My reading of the scene in the first Potions class is Snape's testing Harry to see how much he knows about the WW and whether he deserves his celebrity status. He exposes Harry's ignorance to the Slytherins in part to dispel any delusions on their part that he's a potential Dark Lord that they can rally around (see "Spinner's End"). I don't think his own doubts on that subject are fully resolved, which IMO explains his reaction to the discovery (accidental or deliberate) that Harry is a Parseltongue (and therefore just possibly the person who opened Parseltongue Salazar Slytherin's Chamber of Secrets). He pokes holes in Harry's celebrity status (earned through no power or effort of his own), perhaps on the theory that an arrogant Harry is a danger to himself and others. (Or maybe I'm projecting my own view onto Snape. :-) ) And he presents Harry with information that will be important to him later. The Bezoar question, in particular, has important consequences, saving Ron's life in HBP (along with the Prince's--Snape's--marginal notes, which jog Harry's memory of that first class.) > Cassy: > COS: > Snape has his revenge by 'outing' Harry as a Parseltongue and potential Heir of Slytherin. In the end, this leads Harry to risk his life (again) in the Chamber of Secrets and to defeat Riddle (& Lockhart, which is a relief all round). But Snape must be worrying about Harry dying before he can discharge that life-debt... Carol: Why would DDM!Snape seek *revenge* on Harry by outing him as a Parseltongue? If he does so deliberately (and it's one of those ambiguous scenes in which we don't know his motive or even whether he was telling Draco which spell to use), his reaction indicates that he's shrewdly putting two and two together, not necessarily that he plotted to reveal Harry's ability to speak Parseltongue. How could he possibly have anticipated that unless he knew or suspected that Harry's scar contained some of Voldemort's powers? (Not necessarily that it was an accidental Horcrux, which I still don't believe and don't think that even Snape or DD would consider possible.) He may still have harbored suspicions that Harry was a Dark wizard who "defeated" Voldemort through some hidden powers and his ability to speak Parseltongue would strengthen his suspicions (as indicated by his reaction to the Petrified cat incident). Certainly, Snape isn't plotting to get Parseltongue Harry into the Chamber of Secrets. What gets Harry into the Chamber of Secrets (along with Ron for part of the journey) is Possessed!Ginny. Petrified!Hermione has figured out that the monster is a Basilisk, Harry has encountered Tom Riddle through the diary (which neither Snape nor DD knows about), and Harry and Ron have figured out that the murdered Muggleborn is Moaning Myrtle. Harry and Ron overhear Snape showing up Lockhart's incompetence and telling him that this is his chance to deal with the monster, and they get the idea to go to the DADA teacher to help them enter the CoS. Granted, if it hadn't been for Snape, they wouldn't have gone to Lockhart or tried to enter the chamber, but he didn't know they were listening in, and he certainly wasn't enticing them to try to save Ginny themselves. The life debt to James has nothing to do with it. (And that's the one scene where we see concrete evidence of Snape's concern for the students' safety: his hand gripping a chair when he hears that a student has been taking into the chamber.) > Cassy: > Question: does Snape suspect that Harry's scar is a Horcrux? Carol: I seriously doubt it. He may suspect that it contains powers that he acquired from Voldemort, but that's another matter. Or he may suspect that Harry is a Dark wizard in the making, a second Tom Riddle who really is responsible for Petrifying the students. After all, in his mind, James Potter and Sirius Black tried to murder him. Why wouldn't Potter's son, who somehow vaporized a Dark wizard at age one, follow in his father's footsteps, especially if he had Dark powers of his own? Snape could very well think that Harry is the Heir of Slytherin who somehow got placed in the wrong House. (Snape may very well suspect that Voldemort has at least one Horcrux, presumably a powerful magical object made of some durable material, but I doubt that he thinks the *scar* is a Horcrux.) Harry!Horcrux is not canon, BTW, just fan speculation, at least till July 21. > Cassy: > POA: > Well, the result of Snape *totally* losing it in the Shrieking Shack (Lily-died-despite-my-warning -because-James-trusted-you-Sirius!) is that the real culprit, Wormtail, escaped... to rejoin Voldemort. Sirius Black is (still) the Most Wanted, Remus Lupin is a disgraced werewolf and Fudge thinks that Dumbledore employs deranged staff. Nice one, Severus... still it's good to know you're (supposed to be) on our side! > Carol: The result of Snape's entering the Shrieking Shack is that he hears only part of the story (the illegal Animagi) but causes HRH to listen to the rest. (They knock him out because they're not sure who's right and he's preventing them from hearing the rest of Lupin's and Black's story.) If he hadn't entered, suspecting the werewolf of aiding the convicted murderer (and realizing that Harry was also there when he found the Invisibility Cloak), Harry would not have insisted on hearing what Lupin had to say and ended up believing in Black's innocence instead of wanting to kill him. (Harry still has his doubts, and Ron is still defending Scabbers against the seemingly ridiculous charge of being a murdering traitor. Snape, unfortunately, doesn't hear the rest of the story because he's knocked out, and continues to distrust Black even after he finds out that Pettigrew really is alive and the Animagus story is true.) It's *Harry* who saves Wormtail's life (Snape doesn't even know he's there in rat form) and it's Lupin's transformation into a werewolf because he didn't drink the potion that Snape brought him, minutes too late, that enabled Wormtail to escape. Snape later conjures stretchers to rescue HRH and even the supposed murderer Black from the werewolf and any Dementors that decide to return. It *is* good that Snape is on our side or HRH would be dead or worse. As for Lupin being exposed as a werewolf, he did that himself by failing to take his potion and rushing out onto the grounds on a full moon night when he knew three students were out there. What was Snape supposed to tell Fudge? That he'd conjured stretchers to save the murderer from the Dementors? He had to mention the murderer's werewolf accomplice, and the potion he failed to take, for the story to make any sense. Since Snape isn't reprimanded for his words and actions, I'm guessing that he did so with Dumbledore's stated or tacit approval. And, of course, Lupin resigned on his own, having endangered the students all year by concealing information about Black that could have prevented him from entering the school and eliminated the necessity for Dementors guarding the school, not to mention exposed three students to the danger of werewolf bites. True, Snape was not averse to receiving an award for heroism, much less to seeing Sirius Black have his soul sucked (a fate that Harry also thinks Black deserves, as he tells Lupin earlier in the book, PoA Am. ed. 247), but as he twice tells Harry, he's saving Harry's life--or, at least, he thinks he's doing so by tying up a werewolf who's about to transform and holding a convicted murderer at wandpoint. And he does conjure the stretchers later and take four unconscious people to the hospital despite the danger still posed by the werewolf. At any rate, to say that Snape caused Wormtail to escape is to ignore the evidence completely, and it's also unrealistic to think that Lupin's own actions would not have caused both the loss of his job and his exposure as a werewolf (Fudge was at Hogwarts, after all, and saw Snape bringing in the injured Black, whose wounds would need to be explained) with or without Snape's later revelation to his students. If Lupin had not resigned, he would surely have been fired for carelessly placing students in danger (and concealing important information from the headmaster throughout the book). Cassy: > Question: did Lupin really think that Snape gave a **** about the Order of Merlin? Carol: On this one I almost agree with you. I think not receiving it was a minor disappointment, but he certainly didn't rush out after the werewolf who had failed to take his potion and whom he believed to be helping a convicted murderer into the castle with the Order of Merlin in mind. He didn't even realize until he found the Invisibility Cloak at the base of the Whomping Willow that students were involved. I don't know whether Lupin thinks Snape cares about the lost award, but I suspect that, as usual, he's telling half-truths (which puts him in good company, as both Snape and DD habitually do the same thing). > Cassy: > GOF: > This is the one I find *really* tragic. Moody-Crouch made one crucial mistake that should have been enough to unmask him as a Death Eater. Namely, his (completely false) claim that Dumbledore had authorized him to search Snape's Office, which betrayed a fundamental misunderstanding of Dumbledore's character. Snape was appalled and furious ? 'Dumbledore happens to trust me' (GOF25) ? brave words: but did he really believe it? Evidently not. When Crouch cleverly alluded to the Dark Mark - 'spots that don't come off' etc. - Snape was crushed. After that, he didn't dare put Dumbledore's trust to the test, for fear of being more bitterly hurt, IMHO. Thus when Crouch was given the Veritaserum - & confessed that '[Snape] found me in his office, I said I was under orders to search it' - this was almost certainly the first that Dumbledore had heard of the matter! Poor Snape. Now he *knows* it's all his fault (Cedric's murder and Voldemort's return). > Carol: Okay, I agree that Snape was furious with Fake!Moody as evidenced by "Dumbldeore trusts me!" I don't believe, however, that he was "crushed" or began to doubt DD's trust after Crouch!Moody mentioned the Dark Mark. He just realized that the person he thought was the real Moody (apparently) suspected him of putting Harry's name in the Goblet of Fire. He didn't suspect that Fake!Moody himself had robbed his office because he knew from the Marauder's Map and the egg that Harry was standing there on the stairs. He rather angrily conceded defeat to another teacher whom he thought was loyal to Dumbledore, but IMO his later actions, especially revealing his Dark Mark to the recalcitrant Fudge, show him as still very much Dumbledore's man. Neither Harry nor Dumbledore realized who the Fake!Moody was or that he had enchanted the Goblet of Fire to make it a portkey any more than Snape did, and Harry was right there witnessing the conversation between Snape and Fake!Moody. Harry later learned that the real Moody had attended Karkaroff's hearing and doubted that Snape had reformed, so Fake!Moody's remark about hating "a Death Eater who walked free" would suggest to him what Fake!Moody's remark about spots not coming off suggests to Snape--that "Moody" distrusts Snape and believes that he's still loyal to Voldemort. Snape can't prove his loyalty, nor can he speak of such things in front of Harry, whom he doesn't want to understand the implications of the conversation, so he goes back to bed, angry and seemingly misjudged. Of course he didn't report the incident to Dumbledore. It was between him and another teacher, one whom he believed to be an ex-Auror who would naturally be suspicious of an ex-DE. He put two and two together regarding Harry; unfortunately, in the face of an obvious suspect for the theft of his potions supplies, he failed to see the real culprit (the reverse of the situation in SS/PS where Harry falsely suspects Snape). And Fake!Moody had the Marauder's Map that would have revealed his ture identity. It's no more Snape's fault that Wormtail killed Cedric and resurrected Voldemort than it is Harry's or Dumbledore's. None of them knew that Fake!Moody was an imposter, much less that he was a supposedly dead Death Eater. And Cedric wasn't even supposed to be in the graveyard. Should we blame Harry for telling him to grab the cup together? That makes more sense than blaming Snape. Not even Harry, who blames Snape for everything he can think of, has blamed him for Cedric's death or the restoration of Voldemort, all of which are quite properly attributed to the people responsiblem primarily Voldemort. Cassy: > Question: if Snape wasn't in the Graveyard then where was he during > the Third Task? (He's notably absent from the crowd, at least from > Harry's POV.) Carol: He *was* absent from the graveyard as HBP confirms. Where was he? At Dumbledore's right (or left) hand, as usual--right there when DD needed him to help him blast open the door and forcefeed Veritaserum to Crouch!Moody. Why isn't Snape's presence mentioned? Partly because Harry's mind is elsewhere and partly because JKR wants us to wonder at the end of GoF whether he's the one Voldemort believes has left him forever. (He has the excuse that you can't Apparate from Hogwarts and that he couldn't leave Dumbledore's side without arousing suspicion. But clearly, he was right there on the grounds, probably sitting near Dumbledore. And he mentions that Karkaroff fled when the Dark Mark burned, which he could not have known unless he witnessed Karkaroff leaving the judge's stand. > Cassy: > OOtP: > Now Snape's finally in a position to risk his neck spying for the Order... but his penchant for emotional mistakes continues I'm not just referring to the Occlumency 'fiasco' ? but to the stupid taunting of Sirius Black, (which probably *did* make some contribution to the tragedy ? Harry knew his godfather pretty well, IMHO). This means that Snape's most significant role ? as the one who tried to persuade Sirius *not* to go to the Ministry on the fatal day ? is completely overlooked by Harry Potter. Carol: Harry is primarily responsible for the Occlumency fiasco, having refused to practice because he wants to have the dream, not to mention that *he* entered the Pensieve, a point that Dumbledore tactfully neglects to mention when he blames *himself* for the fiasco. As for taunting Sirius Black, both men were behaving immaturely, pushing each other's buttons, with Black calling Snape "Snivellus" and "Malfoy's lap dog" and Snape pointing out that Black was seen by Lucius Malfoy on Platform 9 3/4 (useful information that Black needs to know, however sarcastically delivered) and implying that Black is a coward. As Dumbledore tells Harry later, Black is a grown man and is not going to be prompted into rash action simply because Snape provoked him. His motivation, aside from wanting to escape from the stifling and depressing atmosphere of 12 GP and *do* something, was to help rescue Harry. Black was enjoying himself in his fight with Cousin Bellatrix, to the point of not paying attention to where he was standing. Harry at first blames Bellatrix and tries to get revenge on her, but later he shifts the blame to Snape despite Dumbledore's pointing out that Snape told Black to stay behind and wait for DD. Dumbledore also points out that Snape is responsible for sending the Order to save Harry and company, but Harry doesn't want to hear it. Nor can Dumbledore safely mention what's really on Harry's mind--Black went to the MoM to save him because he, Harry, had believed the vision that Voldemort implanted in his mind. Snape provides a convenient scapegoat but he's less responsible than Black himself, and much less so than the real killer, Bellatrix, and the Dark wizard who sent her to the MoM, Voldemort. (Kreacher, who tricked his master into being away from the fireplace when Harry showed up to check on him, is also partly to blame.) > Cassy: > Question: does Snape *want* Harry to hate him? (Answer: probably yes, actually, if he blames himself for the Potters' deaths.) Carol: Interesting question. Maybe antagonizing and provoking him into misbehaving gives him a reason to hate Harry, but I don't think he starts out hating Harry so much as distrusting him. And Harry's rulebreaking and later "arrogance" make Snape believe that he really is a second James (and "mediocre" at everything except Quidditch to boot)--bad news for the anti-Voldemort forces if he's the only one who can defeat the Dark Lord. > Cassy: > So all this together might help to explain why Snape isn't very good at the Patronus Charm... or at least disagreed with Harry 'on the best way to tackle dementors' Carol: Snape can certainly cast a perfectly good Patronus or he wouldn't be able to communicate with other members of the Order, notably Dumbledore before the battle of the MoM. Snape may well know a more effective method of fighting Dementors that's suitable to a class full of sixth years, most of whom have only cast a Patronus in the RoR without even a Dementor!Boggart to practice against (or not at all if they weren't in the DA). We aren't told what the alternate method is, only that Harry, who knows that casting a Patronus works for *him*, disagrees with Snape. But Snape is both a DADA and a Dark Arts expert, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he knew an alternate method that's easier to use than an advanced spell that many adult wizards can't master and that requires a wizard to concentrate on a happy memory in the face of a monstrous being that's trying to suck out all the wizard's happiness. I'll wager that Hermione remembers Snape's alternate method and uses it in DH when she finds herself unable to cast a Patronus. Carol, who agrees that Snape is a tragic figure but is not at all persuaded by Cassy's interpretation From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Feb 2 19:27:44 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:27:44 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164522 Carol: > They think that a Horcrux can be created accidentally. Some, not all, > of them think that the spell can be performed in advance (which still > doesn't explain how the soul bit got into Harry, who surely wouldn't > be an ideal container for the soul bit created from his own murder). > > At any rate, while I entirely agree with hpcentaur that Harry is not a > Horcrux, I disagree that her religion has anything to do with it. I > simply think that the arguments for an accidental Horcrux are > unconvincing, that the powers in his scar can be otherwise explained, > and that the whole concept would cause unnecessary plot complications > in an already complex plot. Jen: I'm interested in the point about the scar being otherwise explained and how Harry as a Horcrux adds an unnecessary complication. As of yet there's no explanation for the scar connection, no mechanism has been introduced and Dumbledore only says they are 'connected by the curse that failed' and can't explain why. What it seems to come down to is whether JKR wants to introduce a mechanism for an accidental Horcrux or one for how the rebounded AK connected Harry and Voldemort. Neither would add to the complex plot so much as explain something in need of explanation. At least the scar being a Horcrux, if true, would not introduce a completely new concept into the story. The biggest evidence I see against the scar as a Horcrux is that Lily's protection is supposed to keep Voldemort from touching Harry so how could his soul piece make it into Harry's forehead? Unless the soul piece squeaked in before the protection took place or the protection is just against Voldemort's body. But JKR could easily explain an accidental Horcrux the way she does the scar connection--strange things happen and not even Dumbledore knows why! Jen From katmandu2007 at mail2world.com Fri Feb 2 19:23:13 2007 From: katmandu2007 at mail2world.com (katmandu_85219) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:23:13 -0000 Subject: Was Eileen a Slytherin? (Was: The Irma/Eileen Theory & Snape's Return) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164523 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" : > > As for Eileen's being in Slytherin, we're on somewhat shakier ground, > but, again, I agree with zgirnius. In addition to the Houses tending > to run in families, we have the (admittedly not definitive) evidence > of Eileen's general unattractiveness. With the exception of the Blacks > and possibly the Malfoys, the Slytherins tend to be relatively > unattractive, ranging from the (merely) fat Slughorn to the apelike > Crabbe and Goyle, the pug-faced Pansy Parkinson, and the large, > square-jawed Millicent Bulstrode. (IIRC, Marcus Flint, who may be > related to the Bulstrodes based on the Black family tree, is described > as looking like he has Troll blood--not likely to be true, but hardly > indicative of good looks.) Eileen's description, "a skinny girl of > around fifteen . . . simultaneously cross and sullen, with heavy brows > and a long, pallid face" (HBP 537) fits right in with the generally > unattractive typical Slytherin--and sounds rather similar to her > (Slytherin) son, who was also skinny and pallid as a teenager. > (Nothing about a hooked nose, though.) > I find it very interesting the theory that Slytherins are very unattractive. They are being seen through the eyes of a very critical enemy of their house. "Ape-like" could be big and burly like the gov of California (Arnold S.), "pug-faced" could be used to describe Bette Davis, skinny girl with heavy brows could describe the young Brooke Shields, and how many attractive people have strong jaws? Barbara Hutton certainly comes to mind, and she was beautiful. As for the "hooked nose" and "greasy hair", I've seen many attractive people with aquiline noses and glossy black hair. As for pallid, I think most of the students probably appear rather sun starved. They spend so much time in classes, and England is not all that warm and sunny. katmandu_85219 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 19:47:07 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:47:07 -0000 Subject: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702020907t5f7f855du419db114782dd8fc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164524 va32h wrote: > > From Snape's memories, as seen by Harry, it appears that Snape resembles his father, in terms of the hooked nose, at least. The mother in that memory is not described as having a hooked nose. I don't think her nose is described at all, actually. But it's the mention of the man's hooked nose that is supposed to be our clue that Snape is recalling his parents, isn't it? > > > montims: > I am not convinced that that is the case - I believe Jo is hoodwinking us - in very quick succession, we see the crying boy, the flyshooter, the unsuccessful rider, and we assume in each case that they are Snape, and that they are in chronological order. Harry doesn't say whether or not he recognises any of the characters, only that they were not his memories. We assume he identifies Snape. It happens so quickly, then stops with "Enough!" and we don't go back to analyse the images. > > I believe that the shouting man was Snape. We don't know who the > cowering woman or the crying boy are, or why they are cowering/crying. Carol: While I *do* think that the memories are Snape's and that Harry is right to assume that the crying child is Snape, I agree that the shouting man may not be Snape's father. Surely, he can't be Snape himself, whom Harry would recognize (he has no trouble recognizing Teen!Severus in the Pensieve later, and he sees adult!Snape every day). But I can't help having my doubts that Eileen, the gobstones champion (which probably takes skill and nerve considering what happens to the loser of the game) would be intimidated by a Muggle, however angry, or would hesitate to hex him if he gave her grief. (From whom did Severus inherit his gift for hexes, demonstrated at age eleven, if not from her?) And fleeting though the memory was, it was in Harry's *head.* Surely he would have noticed if the man was wearing Muggle clothes and the narrator, reporting from his point of view, would have mentioned that interesting detail? I think that the shouting man was Severus's grandfather, the Pureblood Prince, from whom he inherited his hooked nose (and who may have taught him some hexes or at least allowed him the use of a wand and a cauldron while simultaneously neglecting him and implying tht he was inferior to his pureblood relatives). Teen!Severus, pallid and skinny, shows signs of neglect, yet no deficiencies in his pre-Hogwarts magical education. My tentative conclusion is that Tobias was out of the picture by the time of that memory, having either died or deserted his witch wife and wizard child after discovering (perhaps through accidental magic on Sevvy's part) what they were. Eileen would then have returned home to her fathef, who was angry with her for marrying a Muggle in the first place and daring to taint his home with her Half-Blood child. Speculation, of course, but it answers questions for me that viewing the man as Tobias leaves open. But it's worth noting that the woman in the memory (whom I do think is Severus's mother) isn't described as having a hooked nose, nor is Teen!Eileen in HBP, so it's unlikely that Eileen is Madam Pince, or vice versa. Carol, agreeing with montims that Harry's interpretation of the memories may not be quite on the money and hoping that we learn the truth about them in DH (I know; I know. The book is about Harry, not Snape. But I can still hope.) From happydogue at aol.com Fri Feb 2 19:54:22 2007 From: happydogue at aol.com (happydogue at aol.com) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 14:54:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Was Eileen a Slytherin? (Was: The Irma/Eileen Theory & Snape's Return) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <8C9151B11AB3C7C-17CC-2166@MBLK-M04.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164525 We are also getting our views through the eyes of teenaged kids who then to label other kids they don't like through physical qualities. What the in crowd thinks of "ape like" could just be another tag for being tall. How many of us were called "fat" by other kids and really were quite normal for our height but just different than the others. J in WI --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" : > > As for Eileen's being in Slytherin, we're on somewhat shakier ground, > but, again, I agree with zgirnius. In addition to the Houses tending > to run in families, we have the (admittedly not definitive) evidence > of Eileen's general unattractiveness. With the exception of the Blacks > and possibly the Malfoys, the Slytherins tend to be relatively > unattractive, ranging from the (merely) fat Slughorn to the apelike > Crabbe and Goyle, the pug-faced Pansy Parkinson, and the large, > square-jawed Millicent Bulstrode. (IIRC, Marcus Flint, who may be > related to the Bulstrodes based on the Black family tree, is described > as looking like he has Troll blood--not likely to be true, but hardly > indicative of good looks.) Eileen's description, "a skinny girl of > around fifteen . . . simultaneously cross and sullen, with heavy brows > and a long, pallid face" (HBP 537) fits right in with the generally > unattractive typical Slytherin--and sounds rather similar to her > (Slytherin) son, who was also skinny and pallid as a teenager. > (Nothing about a hooked nose, though.) > ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Lana.Dorman at Adelphigroup.com Fri Feb 2 19:40:28 2007 From: Lana.Dorman at Adelphigroup.com (kibakianakaya) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:40:28 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164526 > > Alla: > > > > .... as I said many times I wish JKR would have shown > > blood protection in working. It would have been much > > more convincing to me, ... > > > bboyminn: > > I'm not 100% convinced we won't see the last vestiges of > the Blood Protection. I can't imagine that there will not > be an attempt on Harry at the Dursleys, and maybe, just > maybe, the timing will be off enough to allow us to see > the Protection in action. I know the chance is slim, but > I won't give up hope until I've read the last page and > closed the book. > > For what it's worth. > > Steve/bboyminn > Lilygale here: There is canon suggesting that some type of blood protection will last past Harry's 17th birthday. "[Voldemort] didn't realize that love as powerful as your mother's for you leaves it's own mark. Not a scar, no visible sign...to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who loved us is gone. will give us some protection *forever*." (SS Scholastic ed pg 299, my emphasis on forever). Don't know what it might be, but I would bet it has something to do with that gleam in Dumbledore's eye. I don't think that one has played out yet. Lilygale From jnferr at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 20:01:07 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 14:01:07 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: References: <8ee758b40702020907t5f7f855du419db114782dd8fc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40702021201m54f4fddxea1b11fd8dded542@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164527 On 2/2/07, justcarol67 wrote: > va32h wrote: > > > From Snape's memories, as seen by Harry, it appears that Snape > resembles his father, in terms of the hooked nose, at least. The > mother in that memory is not described as having a hooked nose. I > don't think her nose is described at all, actually. But it's the > mention of the man's hooked nose that is supposed to be our clue that > Snape is recalling his parents, isn't it? > > > > > montims: > > I am not convinced that that is the case - I believe Jo is > hoodwinking us - in very quick succession, we see the crying boy, the > flyshooter, the unsuccessful rider, and we assume in each case that > they are Snape, and that they are in chronological order. Harry > doesn't say whether or not he recognises any of the characters, only > that they were not his memories. We assume he identifies Snape. It > happens so quickly, then stops with "Enough!" and we don't go back to > analyse the images. > > > > I believe that the shouting man was Snape. We don't know who the > > cowering woman or the crying boy are, or why they are > cowering/crying. > > Carol: > While I *do* think that the memories are Snape's and that Harry is > right to assume that the crying child is Snape, I agree that the > shouting man may not be Snape's father. Surely, he can't be Snape > himself, whom Harry would recognize (he has no trouble recognizing > Teen!Severus in the Pensieve later, and he sees adult!Snape every > day). montims: OK - maybe I need to take the books out *again*! I was under the impression that while the memories are Snape's, the characters in the memories were NOT identified - where does Harry actually acknowledge that any of the persons were (or were not) Snape? I may be wrong, but I thought that was misdirection - the reader assumes they are Snape, advancing in order of age, but it is not specified, and I don't think we know who Harry recognised... If I am wrong, I apologise for labouring this point, but I do think it is important - the memories flash by really quickly, and are then driven out of his mind - is the way I remember it... From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 20:32:02 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:32:02 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702021232y12c73440oe10d48200189195e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164528 > > Alla: > > > > .... as I said many times I wish JKR would have shown > > blood protection in working. It would have been much > > more convincing to me, ... > > > bboyminn: > > I'm not 100% convinced we won't see the last vestiges of > the Blood Protection. I can't imagine that there will not > be an attempt on Harry at the Dursleys, and maybe, just > maybe, the timing will be off enough to allow us to see > the Protection in action. I know the chance is slim, but > I won't give up hope until I've read the last page and > closed the book. > > For what it's worth. > > Steve/bboyminn > Lilygale here: There is canon suggesting that some type of blood protection will last past Harry's 17th birthday. "[Voldemort] didn't realize that love as powerful as your mother's for you leaves it's own mark. Not a scar, no visible sign...to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who loved us is gone. will give us some protection *forever*." (SS Scholastic ed pg 299, my emphasis on forever). Don't know what it might be, but I would bet it has something to do with that gleam in Dumbledore's eye. I don't think that one has played out yet. Lilygale ======================================= Jeremiah: I recall an interview where JKR talked about the issue with Blood. Harry's blood, his mother's blood, pure-blood, half-blood... maybe it was on her website. DD mentions an ancient magic protecting Harry based on his mother's sacrifice. LV mentiones the same issue in GoF. That is why LV cannot touch him... however, LV made a huge leap forward by using Harry's blood to resurect his body and now that LV can touch Harry I don't see why there is a big show put on about Harry staying at the Dursleys unless there is some other protection placed on the house besides the "blood" connection. I'm sure Arabella Figg isn't going to take down a hoard of Death Eaters with her cans of cat-food, or the cat's themselves... lol... "Get him mister Tibbles!" ok.... Alla, Rowling has expressed that Quirrelll could not touch Harry due to Lily's love and, as I understand it, it is through her blood/Harry's blood that it is passed. And... that's all I've got as far as cannon when it comes to tangible proof... Dumbledore's gleaming eye... well, that's what has been creeping me out for the last few years. His eyes went dull when he left Harry at the Dursley's and then the gleamed then Harry told him about LV using Harry's blood. Why the Gleam? WHYYY!! I'll ahve to think about it but I have suspicions that using Harry's blood would mean that LV and Harry, now being able to touch eachother, can now actually kill one another and that was a huge hurdle. Also, if Harry's blood carried Lily's love and sacrifice it will be a weapon against LV as that love slowly creeps around within him. Possibly weakening LV and slowly eating away at him... Harry's blood, in some way, made LV's body possible and that is a very risky thing to do. I agree that in the final book we will see how this comes into play and I'm sure that even though JKR has said there aren't any more secrets as of HBP there will be twists and turns as the story plays out. Small points that are suddeny bigger players that we have thought. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From va32h at comcast.net Fri Feb 2 20:35:06 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 20:35:06 -0000 Subject: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702021201m54f4fddxea1b11fd8dded542@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164529 > montims: > OK - maybe I need to take the books out *again*! I was under the > impression that while the memories are Snape's, the characters in the > memories were NOT identified - where does Harry actually acknowledge > that any of the persons were (or were not) Snape? I may be wrong, but > I thought that was misdirection - the reader assumes they are Snape, > advancing in order of age, but it is not specified, and I don't think > we know who Harry recognised... > > If I am wrong, I apologise for labouring this point, but I do think it > is important - the memories flash by really quickly, and are then > driven out of his mind - is the way I remember it... va32h: No, I don't think it is categorically stated that the child, boy, and teen in the memories are Snape, but I certainly think that is the impression we are supposed to have, and that Harry has. What would be Jo's motivation behind the misdirection? I guess that's my sticking point. I don't understand why Snape would need to have a wife and child introduced at this part of the story. So much has been made about his remorse having to do with the Potters that throwing in this wife/child business in book 7 just seems...unnecessary. We still don't have an adequate explanation of where the Potters fit into Snape's remorse without adding another motivation, is what I'm saying. I love, love, love, Carol's idea that the man is Snape's grandfather, not father. Her entire scenario with Snape's Muggle father abandoning them, a grandfather disliking Half-bloods, is not only plausible but brings a lot to my understanding of Snape. And the importance of good fathering seems to be a recurring theme in the series. I'm just not convinced that we need Snape to be a father, good or bad. va32h From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 20:46:08 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:46:08 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: References: <8ee758b40702021201m54f4fddxea1b11fd8dded542@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <948bbb470702021246r469338b4lb8d25a4d3d21971a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164531 > montims: > OK - maybe I need to take the books out *again*! I was under the > impression that while the memories are Snape's, the characters in the > memories were NOT identified - where does Harry actually acknowledge > that any of the persons were (or were not) Snape? I may be wrong, but > I thought that was misdirection - the reader assumes they are Snape, > advancing in order of age, but it is not specified, and I don't think > we know who Harry recognised... > > If I am wrong, I apologise for labouring this point, but I do think it > is important - the memories flash by really quickly, and are then > driven out of his mind - is the way I remember it... va32h: No, I don't think it is categorically stated that the child, boy, and teen in the memories are Snape, but I certainly think that is the impression we are supposed to have, and that Harry has. What would be Jo's motivation behind the misdirection? I guess that's my sticking point. I don't understand why Snape would need to have a wife and child introduced at this part of the story. So much has been made about his remorse having to do with the Potters that throwing in this wife/child business in book 7 just seems...unnecessary. We still don't have an adequate explanation of where the Potters fit into Snape's remorse without adding another motivation, is what I'm saying. I love, love, love, Carol's idea that the man is Snape's grandfather, not father. Her entire scenario with Snape's Muggle father abandoning them, a grandfather disliking Half-bloods, is not only plausible but brings a lot to my understanding of Snape. And the importance of good fathering seems to be a recurring theme in the series. I'm just not convinced that we need Snape to be a father, good or bad. va32h ======================= Jeremiah: I dont' understand something... Why would Snape have someone else's memories in his head? If the child is not Snape then who is it? Would this not be as complicated a point as Snape sudeenly having a wife and kids? (which i truely doubt is the case... the wife and kid(s) that is...). And for the scene to be Snapes grandfather is only the same idea that it would be meaningless to go along with the theory that Snape is really MarriedManWithKids!Snape. So how would StuckWithTheCursesFromHisGrandfather!Snape be any more of a solution? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jnferr at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 20:46:14 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 14:46:14 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: References: <8ee758b40702021201m54f4fddxea1b11fd8dded542@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40702021246s4da8c3ddjcdb8d345edaf5023@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164532 va32h: > > No, I don't think it is categorically stated that the child, boy, and > teen in the memories are Snape, but I certainly think that is the > impression we are supposed to have, and that Harry has. > > What would be Jo's motivation behind the misdirection? I guess that's > my sticking point. I don't understand why Snape would need to have a > wife and child introduced at this part of the story. So much has been > made about his remorse having to do with the Potters that throwing in > this wife/child business in book 7 just seems...unnecessary. We still > don't have an adequate explanation of where the Potters fit into > Snape's remorse without adding another motivation, is what I'm saying. > > I love, love, love, Carol's idea that the man is Snape's grandfather, > not father. Her entire scenario with Snape's Muggle father abandoning > them, a grandfather disliking Half-bloods, is not only plausible but > brings a lot to my understanding of Snape. And the importance of good > fathering seems to be a recurring theme in the series. > > I'm just not convinced that we need Snape to be a father, good or bad. > > va32h montims: See, I don't think this is his wife and child. I think he is shouting at the woman for another reason, and I wonder who the woman and child are, and why he is shouting at her. I could speculate, but until DH that would be fruitless. Anyway, I have beaten this dead horse long enough, and thank you all for your patience! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 21:00:24 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:00:24 -0000 Subject: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702021201m54f4fddxea1b11fd8dded542@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164533 montims wrote: > OK - maybe I need to take the books out *again*! I was under the impression that while the memories are Snape's, the characters in the memories were NOT identified - where does Harry actually acknowledge that any of the persons were (or were not) Snape? I may be wrong, but I thought that was misdirection - the reader assumes they are Snape, advancing in order of age, but it is not specified, and I don't think we know who Harry recognised... > > If I am wrong, I apologise for labouring this point, but I do think it is important - the memories flash by really quickly, and are then driven out of his mind - is the way I remember it... Carol responds: Here's the relevant canon: "Harry did not speak; he felt that to say anything might be dangerous. He was sure that he had just broken into Snape's memories, that he had just seen scenes from Snape's childhood, and it was unnerving to think that the crying little boy who had watched his parents shouting at him was actually standing in front of him with such loathing in his eyes" (OoP Am. ed. 392). So, yes, we're seeing Harry's interpretation via the narrator and it isn't necessarily accurate. But the idea that the little boy is Snape isn't fan speculation. It's right in the text. (*Would* it have been dangerous to speak? Maybe he'd have been surprised by Snape's answer. Or maybe not.) And since Harry knows exactly what Snape looks like and snape is standing in front of him, I don't think he could mistake the identity of the man if he were Snape himself. And Snape has to be in the memory since it's his memory, which makes him the child (and the boy in the other two memories). But I still think that Harry could be wrong about the man being Snape's father for the reasons I stated in my previous post. Carol, who agrees that we may be seeing some misdirection here, but perhaps not to the extent you suggest P.S. Sorry for accidentally offlisting this message! From va32h at comcast.net Fri Feb 2 21:02:28 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:02:28 -0000 Subject: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702021246r469338b4lb8d25a4d3d21971a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164534 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jeremiah LaFleur" > Jeremiah: > > I dont' understand something... > Why would Snape have someone else's memories in his head? If the child is > not Snape then who is it? Would this not be as complicated a point as Snape > sudeenly having a wife and kids? (which i truely doubt is the case... the > wife and kid(s) that is...). And for the scene to be Snapes grandfather is > only the same idea that it would be meaningless to go along with the theory > that Snape is really MarriedManWithKids!Snape. So how would > StuckWithTheCursesFromHisGrandfather!Snape be any more of a solution? va32h: Now I don't understand something...I certainly didn't say that Snape had anyone else's memory in his head. As you said yourself, why would he? I don't think that whether the hook-nosed man is Snape's father or grandather fundamentally changes the impact of that scene - his mother is scared and Snape is crying. It would be more interesting if it were his grandfather. StuckWithCursesFromSomeSignificantMale!Snape is what we have either way, isn't it? Assuming there was some purpose to JKR's showing us those memories other than fleeting sympathy. It helps explain what drew Snape to the DE. He and Voldemort would have similar upbringings. AvengingWifeandChild!Snspe is an entirely different animal, IMO. va32h From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 21:14:23 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:14:23 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164535 Carol earlier: > > > They think that a Horcrux can be created accidentally. Some, not all, of them think that the spell can be performed in advance (which still doesn't explain how the soul bit got into Harry, who surely wouldn't be an ideal container for the soul bit created from his own murder). > > > > At any rate, while I entirely agree with hpcentaur that Harry is not a Horcrux, I disagree that her religion has anything to do with it. I simply think that the arguments for an accidental Horcrux are unconvincing, that the powers in his scar can be otherwise explained, and that the whole concept would cause unnecessary plot complications in an already complex plot. > Jen responded: I'm interested in the point about the scar being otherwise explained and how Harry as a Horcrux adds an unnecessary complication. > As of yet there's no explanation for the scar connection, no mechanism has been introduced and Dumbledore only says they are 'connected by the curse that failed' and can't explain why. > > What it seems to come down to is whether JKR wants to introduce a mechanism for an accidental Horcrux or one for how the rebounded AK connected Harry and Voldemort. Neither would add to the complex plot so much as explain something in need of explanation. At least the scar being a Horcrux, if true, would not introduce a completely new concept into the story. Carol responds: JKR merely needs to introduce an explanation for how Harry acquired some of Voldemort's *powers.* Nothing has been said by DD or anyone else to indicate that his scar includes a bit of Voldemort's *soul.* Certainly, he isn't possessed, as I've already established. And we know form both canon and interviews that the spell Voldemort cast, and which was deflected by Lily's self-sacrifice, was a Killing Curse, not whatever incantation is required to create a Horcrux. There's no indication that a Horcrux could be created accidentally, and no convincing reason for Voldemort to deliberately turn the body or skull of the boy he was trying to kill to thwart the Prophecy into a Horcrux. It's no less likely that powers, which are intangible, could enter Harry's forehead through the cut (which must have been caused by the spell bursting outward since an AK doesn't cause a mark or wound) than that a floating soul bit, also intangible, could do so. A spell is required to encase an intangible soul bit into an object or living being. How, then could it happen accidentally? And if it could be cast in advance, then the soul bit would have gone into the prepared container, not into Harry. We don't even know that detached soul bits float around aimlessly if their owner is vaporized. It's just as likely, if not more so, that they go beyond the Veil to their eternal home. I've also postulated that since blood has magical properties, whether its wizards' blood or dragon's blood or unicorn blood, that Voldie's powers could have entered Harry's open wound through a drop of blood, surely at least as plausible as a bit of intangible soul entering him without possessing him (we know he isn't possessed) and without a spell (absurdly) preparing the child LV is trying to kill to become a Horcrux. As for the complications I was speaking of, I'm talking about the stand off. How can Harry kill Voldemort or otherwise destroy him if he or his scar is a Horcrux anchoring Voldie's soul to the earth? We'd have Vapormort all over again. And if Voldemort killed Harry, inadvertently destroying one of his Horcruxes, how could Dead!Harry kill him? They AK each other? I don't think Harry will use AK as his weapon. They fall off Reichenbach Falls together? I think that Harry will defeat Voldemort through the power of Love (his willingness to sacrifice himself, not necessarily meaning that he will actually die) and through another power peculiar to Voldemort that he acquired at GH, the power of possession. (Please refer to my previous posts on this topic if you're interested.) > Jen: > The biggest evidence I see against the scar as a Horcrux is that Lily's protection is supposed to keep Voldemort from touching Harry so how could his soul piece make it into Harry's forehead? Unless the soul piece squeaked in before the protection took place or the protection is just against Voldemort's body. > Carol: Exactly. The sacrifice would deflect a soul bit as easily as it deflected the AK. But Voldie's *powers* via a drop of blood or any other mechanism would be a weapon that could ultimately be turned against him (making Harry Voldemort's equal, as symbolized by the scar). And as I said above, the cut had to precede whatever entered Harry, partly because it was the means of entry and partly because it must have been caused by the deflected curse bursting outward. (I can't see any other cause of a magical scar that binds Harry to Voldemort, certainly not a bit of house falling on him.) Anyway, those are my reasons for not believing that Harry is a Horcrux, nor will I believe it until and unless I read it in DH, at which time I'll ask Alla for her recipe for crow ;-) From mkboland66 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 20:35:59 2007 From: mkboland66 at yahoo.com (mkboland66) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 20:35:59 -0000 Subject: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702021201m54f4fddxea1b11fd8dded542@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164536 > > Carol: > > While I *do* think that the memories are Snape's and that Harry is > > right to assume that the crying child is Snape, I agree that the > > shouting man may not be Snape's father. Surely, he can't be Snape > > himself, whom Harry would recognize (he has no trouble recognizing > > Teen!Severus in the Pensieve later, and he sees adult!Snape every > > day). > A word to add to Carol's supposition: isn't it possible that the hooked-nosed man was Eileen Prince Snape's father, perhaps angry at his muggle-connected pureblood daughter? Just a thought... mkboland66 From entangledhere at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 21:57:54 2007 From: entangledhere at yahoo.com (Sunny) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 13:57:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux Message-ID: <9361.17412.qm@web51412.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164538 As for Harry being a Horcrux... How about this? He WAS one, but he isn't anymore. I contribute this brilliant revelation to Louis CasaBiana, whose book, Defogging the Future, is a masterpiece that everyone should read. www.defogthefuture.com You see, there are 24 hours missing. What if those 24 hours were taken to remove the piece of soul from Harry, and THAT'S what left the scar, since the AK curse leaves no mark? A very valid theory. *Sunny* We are the music makers. We are the dreamers of the dreams. http://www.sunnychristian.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com Fri Feb 2 19:05:29 2007 From: cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com (Unspeakable) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:05:29 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164539 Oryomai: I am not entirely sure what you are trying to do with this post. To me, it comes across as an attempt to blame Severus for things that he was not a part of. I am slightly aghast at your implication that Severus is responsible for the return of Voldemort and the death of Diggory. If there is something in your post that I am missing, I would be very happy if you could explain it to me. Hi Oryomai - I must hasten to reassure you that I *don't* believe Severus Snape to be strictly responsible for any of this (although I do think that JKR has succeeded in creating marvelous ambiguity about his actions in earlier books!) And I speak as someone who is 99.9% behind Snape as the Tragic Hero of HBP. I don't blame Snape for killing Dumbledore in accordance with a pre-arranged plan. However, I do think that Snape is likely to blame *himself* for various outcomes - in particular, his failure to prevent Harry (whom I believe he is trying to protect) from coming so close to death. And I am interested in such questions as: why * did* Snape give Malfoy the spell to conjure the snake in COS11? (I don't believe in coincidences! *cough* Mark Evans *cough*) Why was he *so* demented at the end of POA? And what of Snape's (apparent) failure to report Moody-Crouch to Dumbledore? This was a fatal error and though (of course) it doesn't make Snape morally responsible for Cedric's death or Voldemort's return, it is surely interesting as a character note? (The real Alastor Moody might well have searched Snape's Office but he wouldn't have lied IMHO and I am sure that Dumbledore (if he'd been told) would have realized this and put it together with other suspicious happenings at Hogwarts to form the right conclusion.) In any case, it's diverting to look beyond what Red Hen calls 'the Harry filter' and try to see events in the earlier books from Snape's POV or Dumbledore's. And one of the reasons why I'm looking forward to Book 7 so much is that (in supplying the crucial information re. character & motivation) it will effectively rewrite Books 1-6. We'll finally be able to see it all from JKR's perspective (I hope)! To respond to some other points... a) I agree, Oryomai, that we don't know for sure whether or not Snape was acting on DD's orders in PS/SS. (However, I suspect that if the two of them *had* been working together, then they would have been rather more effective! For example: if Dumbledore had everything under control then why the need for Snape to get bitten? Snape obviously had no idea how to get past Fluffy!) It's also hard to know what Dumbledore *knew* in COS, POA & GOF. This is one of the most tantalizing/frustrating issues in the Potterverse, IHMO... somehow the more omniscient we make Dumbledore, the more problematic his deployment of that knowledge becomes, though I must protest your characterization of him as 'an evil puppetmaster'! :-) b) (How) did Snape know that Harry was a Parselmouth? Obviously, I don't know for sure that he knew... though I do think it's interesting that Snape encouraged Malfoy to set a snake on Harry at the dueling club and delayed removing it until Harry had demonstrated his knowledge of Parseltongue. 'Snape moved closer to Malfoy, bent down and whispered something in his ear.' (COS11) After all, Snape told Bellatrix of rumours circulating "that [Harry] was himself a great Dark wizard, which was how he had survived the Dark Lord's attack." (HBP2) As for whether Snape knew about Horcruxes... Hmm... c) I don't *blame* Snape for his behaviour in the Shack but it did seem to require more of an explanation than we received. It's Harry's suggestion that does Snape the biggest disservice, IMHO: "YOU'RE PATHETIC! JUST BECAUSE THEY MADE A FOOL OF YOU AT SCHOOL YOU WON'T EVEN LISTEN--" (POA19) Clearly, we haven't been told everything. And isn't it interesting that Snape a) didn't know that Wormtail was the Secret Keeper (unlike the DEs in Azkaban) and b) seems to have been (the only one?) to suspect Sirius * before* the events at Godric's Hollow? 'You'd have died like your father, too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black ?' (POA19). Now what was *that* about? c) To answer, va32h: I think the significance of Harry not registering that Snape had tried to *stop* Sirius from going to his death is that Harry's feelings for Snape notably worsened during the summer after Sirius's death (HBP8). Hence the quote: "He hated my dad like he hated Sirius! Haven't you noticed, Professor [Dumbledore], how the people Snape hates tend to end up dead?" (HBP25) This clearly bodes ill for the future! d) I really like your take on Snape's psychology, va32h! I would suggest further that suggest that Snape has been unconsciously goading Harry to treat him with the hated he thinks he deserves deliberately provoking him from the beginning, as if in readiness for the day when Harry found out about his betrayal. e) Agree heartily with Finwitch that DD hasn't done enough to convince Harry to trust Snape... but I have my own theory about that (see below!)... Cassy V. :-) P.S. If anyone's interested, I put together the following evidence-based 'synopsis' of Book 7 as a way of integrating various theories. Here are the extracts relating to Snape ? hope it helps! Snape, Lily & Petunia: http://book7.co.uk/three/ Snape & Regulus: http://book7.co.uk/seven/ Snape & Dumbledore: http://book7.co.uk/nine/ Snape's fate (& knowledge of Horcruxes): http://book7.co.uk/fourteen/ Repercussions for Harry: http://book7.co.uk/fifteen/ & the end of the series: http://book7.co.uk/sixteen/ From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Feb 2 22:44:08 2007 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:44:08 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164540 Just because Rowling does not focus on it doesn't mean we're supposed to think nothing is going on when the girls are gossipping about tattooes in private places and kids are being caught making out in the bushes. As in an old-fashioned movie, it is easy to imagine there is more going on than is seen "on-screen." -- Matt > > Bart asked: > > Hogwarts has students from 10-17. Doesn't ANYBODY > > have sex? > > Nikkalmati replied: > > Part of the answer, of course, is that none of that is > relevant to the plot and also it is a story for young > children. . . . We see from Snape rousting couples out > of the bushes at the Yule Ball that it is not from lack > of trying. I assume some couples are successful at > getting together, but the situation and the teachers > make it hard. From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 22:50:39 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 14:50:39 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: <9361.17412.qm@web51412.mail.yahoo.com> References: <9361.17412.qm@web51412.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <948bbb470702021450g6bf9fe08t51e95dd8ad50c572@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164541 As for Harry being a Horcrux... How about this? He WAS one, but he isn't anymore. I contribute this brilliant revelation to Louis CasaBiana, whose book, Defogging the Future, is a masterpiece that everyone should read. www.defogthefuture.com You see, there are 24 hours missing. What if those 24 hours were taken to remove the piece of soul from Harry, and THAT'S what left the scar, since the AK curse leaves no mark? A very valid theory. *Sunny* ===================================== Jeremiah: I'm not so sure about Hary having anything removed from him. Weh ave to keep a perspetive that the AK curse kills without leaving a mark, but Harry wasn't killed and he has a mark. It is assumed that nobody has ever survived the curse except for Harry and, therefore, we have no idea why a scar would be the result of the events that happened in Godric Hollow. As far as Harry being or not being a Horcrux... well, if the Diary was a Horcrux and we met the young Tom Riddle, then Harry's supposed Horcrux would only be the Voldemort from the night LV killed Harry's parents. Also, if Harry is a Horcrux then LV's "mental" (or what-have-you) visitations would have shown LV that part of him is stuck in Harry. I do not think LV would simply leave a part of his sould all lone in the head/body of the enemy. He'd keep tabs on it. and LV hasn't. Also, the theory that Harry is possessed by LV and that must mean Harry is a Horcrux... well, the feelings of anger, the sudden shifts in mood are from the current LV and Harry's behavionr as a Horcrux should be from the LV that was split off in Gordric Hollw. (Now I'm repeating myself... sorry). The theory doesn't quite fit. It's agood idea, it is possible.... it's just not completely making sense. And... who would have removed the Horcrux from Harry's head? Hagrid? Sirius? Mad-Eye? Madame Pomfrey? Deddalus Diggle? Snape? And then, knowing that Horcruxes aren't widely acknowledged as even existing in the WW (Sloghorn's dialogue w/ Tom... from his memory) who would have even guessed that this would be the case and know to remove it ASAP? Do we even know if Snape is aware? I also think that removing a Horcrux, accidental or on purpose, would be very risky business and we have seen that it's removal destroys the object it was hidden in. jeremiah: who hopes Harry doesn't turn out to be a Horcrux 'cause that's just silly to him... but if Harry is a Horcrux he'll eat his own hat and graciously accept the riddicule that follows... 'cause he's good at dishing it out, too... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Feb 2 23:20:25 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 23:20:25 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164542 > Alla: Alla: > All that was needed for Dumbledore in PoA to find out the truth was > **one** talk with Sirius, just one. Pippin: One talk, *after* Sirius had proved himself by not killing Harry, Lupin, Hermione, Ron, and Snape when he had the chance. > Alla: > > Well, to this reader Dumbledore in this speech of his comes out > precisely as equating pampering with nurture and love and then having > a nerve to say that it is bad for Harry. Pippin: What in the speech do you take as equating pampering with nurture and love? Pippin From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 23:53:41 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 23:53:41 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164543 > Cassy V: > c) I don't *blame* Snape for his behaviour in the Shack but it did > seem to require more of an explanation than we received. It's > Harry's suggestion that does Snape the biggest disservice, IMHO: "YOU'RE > PATHETIC! JUST BECAUSE THEY MADE A FOOL OF YOU AT SCHOOL YOU WON'T > EVEN LISTEN--" (POA19) Clearly, we haven't been told everything. zgirnius: This is after Lupin has made the same charge. I think Snape has already denied it, when he yells to Hermione "DON'T TALK ABOUT THINGS YOU DON"T UNDERSTAND!", earlier in that same scene. It seems to me HBP has supplied the clues to Snape's reactions in this scene. He is so angry at Sirius, because he, Snape, regretted telling the prophecy to Voldemort, and became a spy at 'great personal risk' (GoF) in part to try and avert the danger. And then Black, he believes, betrayed them anyway, wasting all thast effort. (If Snape had any special feelings for Lily, this would only make his reactions even more understandable). Cassy V: > and b) seems to have been > (the only one?) to suspect Sirius * before* the events at Godric's > Hollow? 'You'd have died like your father, too arrogant to believe you > might be mistaken in Black ?' (POA19). Now what was *that* about? zgirnius: Personally, I think Snape may have warned James personally, or through Potter, that Voldemort had subverted his Secret Keeper. Peter was, apparently, the SK for a week, so Voldemort did not act immediately, which leaves more time for leaks (hypothetically) to have happened. I don't think Snape had specific information about Sirius: I think it was more that he knew 1) the Fidelius had been cast, and 2) Voldemort was convinced he could find the Potters, and deduced 3) Sirius was a traitor, because the whole point of the switch was to tell everyone Sirius was the SK. From jmestacio at yahoo.com Fri Feb 2 23:17:34 2007 From: jmestacio at yahoo.com (argentumangela) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 23:17:34 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164544 > Carol: > But Horcruxes and possession aren't exactly the same thing. The > Harry!Horcrux supporters (and I'm not one of them) aren't arguing > that Harry is possessed by Voldemort's soul, the ragged remnant > of which is now inside his own restored body. They're arguing that > a *bit* or fragment of Voldemort's soul, split off by the murder of > Harry's mother, entered the cut on his forehead and is now encased > in the scar, much as a soul bit is deliberately encased in an > object (or possibly a living creature like Nagini) to create a > Horcrux. They think that a Horcrux can be created accidentally. > Some, not all, of them think that the spell can be performed in > advance (which still doesn't explain how the soul bit got into > Harry, who surely wouldn't be an ideal container for the soul bit > created from his own murder). Hello Carol. I agree with you in saying that horcruxes can't be made accidentally. If you think about it, JKR has always been about choices. Harry survived because his mother chose to sacrifice herself for him. Harry turned his back on the dark arts because he chose Gryffindor instead of Slytherin. The trio was formed because they chose to save Hermione from the troll and she chose to cover up for them. And the prophecy came true mainly from two choices: Voldermort chose to believe it to be true; and Harry ultimately chose to do the right thing and face him in the end to save everyone he cares for. So for an important story arch such as the Horcrux, I doubt JKR will make it possible that such an important part of the story can happen without the effects of her characters' free will. From the disappointment that is Book 6, we were all treated first hand how meticulous Tom Riddle was in choosing, obtaining, making, and hiding each Horcrux. Not to mention that in making one, the wizard (if you think about it) will have to call forth intense amounts of magic and concentration in trying to manipulate such ancient and dark magic or else he'll lose control and who knows what can happen. As for not trying to kill Harry before GoF, I believe he did try though only indirectly. In GoF, one could argue that he was drunk with his own power and so tried to eliminate the one who had first vanquished him. But he hasn't tried to do so directly again, if you will notice in OoTP and HBP. Both encounters weren't direct attacks on Harry. Regarding the prophecy, is anyone else guessing that "the power he knows not" isn't as vague as love as Dumbledore may have intuited? I mean, if it was just the emotion, it didn't really matter if Voldemort heard the complete prohecy right? But the headmaster had the Order guard the DoM primarily. Does anyone think it might be an ancient magic based on the emotion of love that Voldemort might have heard about? Dumbledore has said that Voldemort had always scoffed at the ancient magics based on positive emotions so that implies he has knowledge of it. Which would imply that they do exist and would most probably be what Harry would need to use to defeat him. argentumangela From bawilson at citynet.net Sat Feb 3 00:11:00 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 19:11:00 -0500 Subject: Harry Potter, REALLY for Grown-Ups (well, PG-13 anyway) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164545 Anent 'The Talk', our experiences were different. The school nurse did the girls while the boys' PE teacher did the boys. As the closest thing to a gym teacher they have is Mme. Hooch. . . . Bruce Alan Wilson "The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com Sat Feb 3 00:54:01 2007 From: cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com (Unspeakable) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 00:54:01 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164546 Hi, Carol. Thanks for taking the trouble to reply in detail. :-) Just responding to your response as I'm afraid that my second post, which (for some reason) has only just appeared, was actually submitted and swallowed at 7.05pm before you posted. (I think a few of the issues you mention are touched on in that post though.) I should add the caveat that (as a newbie) my first thread was designed to spark discussion on some Snape-controversies that I find particularly interesting and was therefore slightly tongue-in-cheek (so apologies if I alarmed anyone!); whereas, my attempt at a (reasonably) comprehensive, supported overview can be found online at the link cited below (won't mention this again - but I'd love to know what you make of it...). Anyway, on some specific points... - Carol responds: You're assuming a great deal here, including Snape's jealousy of Harry's relationship with Dumbledore and his resentment of the points awarded to Gryffindor (which I can certainly see the Slytherin *students* resenting) at the last minute. The story is told from Harry's very limited point of view, and we have no idea what went on between Snape and Dumbledore. ... Nor do we know how much Snape knew or what his motivation was since his explanations at Spinner's End are geared to a DE audience. Cassy: Very true. Even allowing for 'the Harry filter', though, I am struck by the immaturity of Snape's behaviour and the main reason I cite jealousy as a probable motivation here is that Snape's chief outburst comes when Dumbledore is being particularly supportive & affectionate towards Harry after the Quidditch match: 'As Gryffindors came spilling onto the field, he saw Snape land nearby, white-faced and tight-lipped -- then Harry felt a hand on his shoulder and looked up into Dumbledore's smiling face. ... Snape spat bitterly on the ground.' (PS/SS13) Slughorn & Scrimgeour (objective outsiders?) both notice Dumbledore's especial closeness to Harry ... indeed Scrimgeour comments that Harry might have been his "favourite ever pupil" (HBP30)... I just wonder if Snape felt it keenly at this moment & resented it. After all, DD is (possibly) his only friend in the world. - Carol: Again, you're assuming. We don't *know* that there's a Lily/Snape connection. Cassy: Again, true... although if you start with that assumption & 'think backwards' it helps an awful lot of theories to work! Carol: Even if Lily was as good at Potions as Slughorn remembers her as being, that doesn't mean she was a potions genius like Severus or that she ever saw his Potions textbook. Good-at-Potions Lily simply misleads Slughorn into thinking that Harry is actually coming up with his own potions improvements. Cassy: So you don't subscribe to the view that it is Lily's *Potions* talent inside that textbook? I find it curious that Slughorn (who taught them all) repeatedly equates Harry with Lily (specifically mentioning her creative brilliance), but compares him favourably to Snape: `But I don't think I've ever known such a natural at Potions! Instinctive, you know ? like his mother! Well, then, it's natural ability! I don't think even you, Severus ?` `Really?' said Snape quietly, his eyes still boring into Harry, who felt a certain disquiet.' (HBP15) In other words, Lily demonstrated the sort of imaginative instinct as a Potioneer that even Snape lacked. And I think Hermione could be right about a female mind at work, though wrong about the handwriting, if Snape copied Lily or they collaborated in Potions. This is what IMHO lends some retrospective poignancy to Snape's initial interrogation of Harry in PS/SS, as if Snape was trying to find out whether Harry was his mother's or his father's son. But as you say, it's not canon (yet!) - Cassy: Question: does Snape suspect that Harry's scar is a Horcrux? Carol: I seriously doubt it. He may suspect that it contains powers that he acquired from Voldemort, but that's another matter. Or he may suspect that Harry is a Dark wizard in the making, a second Tom Riddle who really is responsible for Petrifying the students. After all, in his mind, James Potter and Sirius Black tried to murder him. Why wouldn't Potter's son, who somehow vaporized a Dark wizard at age one, follow in his father's footsteps, especially if he had Dark powers of his own? Snape could very well think that Harry is the Heir of Slytherin who somehow got placed in the wrong House. (Snape may very well suspect that Voldemort has at least one Horcrux, presumably a powerful magical object made of some durable material, but I doubt that he thinks the *scar* is a Horcrux.) Harry!Horcrux is not canon, BTW, just fan speculation, at least till July 21. Cassy: No, it's only speculation, but I do wonder if part of Snape's problem with Harry ? a very large part ? arises not from his facial resemblance to his mother or father but from the fact that he has Voldemort's scar on his forehead. Snape is mortally afraid of Voldemort. Indeed ? though Harry never stopped to think it through ? the main reason that Snape was using a Pensieve for the duration of the Occlumency lessons was not to conceal his thoughts from Harry but to protect them from Voldemort. What if Snape too has seen `a shadow of him stir behind [Harry's] eyes ' (OOtP37)? IMHO, if Harry *is* a Horcrux then Snape might well have seen what Harry is too blind to see... Oh, I can't wait for July 21! Cassy, who would love to type some more but must go to bed. http://book7.co.uk/ From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 01:11:15 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 01:11:15 -0000 Subject: Was Eileen a Slytherin? In-Reply-To: <45C3A9B0.00000B.02620@JUSTME> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164547 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Debi" wrote: > In regarding the Slytherins being of the ugly type. I have to > disagree, besides the Malfoys, the Malfoys in laws were also > described as attractive people. And Tom Riddle was described as a > very handsome boy. Debi, I think that your list of good-looking Slytherins should also include Blaise Zabini and his mother (we are not told, but I'm pretty sure she was in Slytherin). zanooda, who really wanted to add something substantial to this comment to make it look more like a post, but couldn't think of anything :-) From anita_hillin at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 01:35:16 2007 From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 17:35:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <629596.65047.qm@web55106.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164548 Jen Reese pointed out, in response to Carol's argument that a Harry as Horcrux adds unneccesary layers of complication: Jen: I'm interested in the point about the scar being otherwise explained and how Harry as a Horcrux adds an unnecessary complication. As of yet there's no explanation for the scar connection, no mechanism has been introduced and Dumbledore only says they are 'connected by the curse that failed' and can't explain why. akh pipes up: We are told that no one has survived the Avada Kedavra prior to Harry, so it's "side effects" are unknown to the wizarding world. We also know that it's not one of those spells that can be flicked off the end of a wand casually. Crouch!Moody says in GOF that all of the students could point their wands at him and shout the spell, and he woudn't get so much as a nosebleed. If anyone would know it would be him, I might add. He probably had to work his way up to AK. Carol's point that the scar must have been created when the curse exited Harry got me thinking about a possible explanation that would have been set up prior to book 6. My postulation is that perhaps the power necessary to cast an Avada Kedavra is contained in the spell, and perhaps it brings that power with it when it enters the body of the victim. Of course, it's moot in everyone else, because no one else has survived it, but with Harry successfully expelling the curse, the powers are left behind. This would not necessitate Horcrux!Harry, which I admit I also dislike, and it wouldn't introduce some new complication. Jen again: The biggest evidence I see against the scar as a Horcrux is that Lily's protection is supposed to keep Voldemort from touching Harry so how could his soul piece make it into Harry's forehead? akh chimes in: I agree completely. He is protected from Voldemort pre-AK, and I would expect a tainted sould piece would have no more luck against the charm than the rest of Voldy. akh, who's hopelessly behind on reading posts, but just had to butt in - er - share an opinion anyway Recent Activity 78 New Members 1 New Links 1 New Files Visit Your Group Give Back Yahoo! for Good Get inspired by a good cause. Y! Toolbar Get it Free! easy 1-click access to your groups. Yahoo! Groups Start a group in 3 easy steps. Connect with others. . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 01:43:46 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 01:43:46 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164549 > Cassy: > Very true. Even allowing for 'the Harry filter', though, I am struck > by the immaturity of Snape's behaviour and the main reason I cite > jealousy as a probable motivation here is that Snape's chief outburst > comes when Dumbledore is being particularly supportive & affectionate > towards Harry after the Quidditch match: > > 'As Gryffindors came spilling onto the field, he saw Snape land > nearby, white-faced and tight-lipped -- then Harry felt a hand on his > shoulder and looked up into Dumbledore's smiling face. ... Snape spat > bitterly on the ground.' (PS/SS13) zgirnius: Why was Snape refing thje match in the first place, do you think (it's the only time we see him do it in six years)? I think it is because he was anticipating a possible repeat of the previous game (where Harry was nearly hexed off his broom) and wanted to be closer to the action. And what happens? His team loses, everyone thinks he was doing it to cheat, and Dumbledore is there for the game, so that Snape's precaution was not even necessary. Seems like a plenty good reason to be less than pleased, especially if the white-facedness indicates Snape is not an avid flier. (Possible hint of that in one of his memories in OotP, as well...) > Cassy: > So you don't subscribe to the view that it is Lily's *Potions* talent > inside that textbook? I find it curious that Slughorn (who taught them > all) repeatedly equates Harry with Lily (specifically mentioning her > creative brilliance), but compares him favourably to Snape: > > `But I don't think I've ever known such a natural at Potions! > Instinctive, you know ? like his mother! Well, then, it's natural > ability! I don't think even you, Severus ?` `Really?' said Snape > quietly, his eyes still boring into Harry, who felt a certain > disquiet.' (HBP15) zgirnius: In my opinion, this is because Snape may have finished perfecting his potions improvements after his first attempts at those potions. Harry is reading the final notes and using them - naturally his potion is superior. That SLug compares Harry's Potion to Snape's (not Lily's) seems to support that he, at least, saw these students as roughly equals. I do think there was a Lily connection, and it probably involved their common interest in Potions, but I think the creations in the book are Snape's, spells and Potions both. From kjones at telus.net Sat Feb 3 02:06:24 2007 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:06:24 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: <629596.65047.qm@web55106.mail.re4.yahoo.com> References: <629596.65047.qm@web55106.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <45C3EE20.5000408@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164550 > Jen again: > The biggest evidence I see against the scar as a Horcrux is that Lily's > protection is supposed to keep Voldemort from touching Harry so how > could his soul piece make it into Harry's forehead? > akh chimes in: > I agree completely. He is protected from Voldemort pre-AK, and I would expect a tainted sould piece would have no more luck against the charm than the rest of Voldy. > akh, who's hopelessly behind on reading posts, but just had to butt in - er - share an opinion anyway KJ writes: I just have to disagree and put my order in for crow. I think that the whole story is about poor Harry, manipulated by people and events beyond his control, was struck in the head with a flying piece of Voldie's tattered soul. It is not exactly a horcrux, Voldemort did not know anything about it and he can not feel it, just like his horcruxes. How the book ends will depend on Harry's choices about what to do about it, and what Snape's role is in the last book. Harry can be injured by flying objects like bludgers, so it is not out of the question that he was hit by something like a piece of soul. Harry had a dream that he was pursuing "something white" through the forest in PoA, which would indicate to me that Harry was sharing Voldemort's memories of killing the unicorn from PS/SS. This is more than just a sharing of power. We also see Trelawny's readings, where she confused Harry's birthday with that of Riddle. How many of her other readings might apply to Voldemort instead of Harry? We also see more anger and hate build up in PoA, and to extremes in OotP. Once Voldemort occludes against Harry, that anger and hatred comes under control. So, we have thoughts, dreams, memories, legilimency and blocking of Voldemort from Harry. We have confusion about his house and confusion about his birthday. We see a comparison between his memories, and Voldemort's memories. We see Harry oddly affected by Dementers, which just happen to suck out souls, and perhaps the memories Harry is hearing are not his, but those of Voldemort. Dumbledore told Harry that his ability to love protected him from becoming like Voldemort, and the lure of dark magic. That is what stops the soul piece from taking control. Harry can feel it occasionally, as when he was jealous over Ginny, but he does not recognize it. Dumbledore is teaching Harry all about soul pieces and what they do, not how to destroy them, or fight Voldemort, because he knows that won't work. Harry has to find another way. This is obviously much more than a transfer of powers, or a broken piece of teapot caused by the explosion. KJ From kking0731 at gmail.com Sat Feb 3 02:10:09 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 02:10:09 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hollows Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164551 I've been thinking since the title had been released what or where the Deathly Hollows could be, as have we all. There have been many great suggestions some of which have led me to my own far-fetched thinking well...that and a bit of Charmed (the series). In Charmed, the Hollow is an enormous and uncontrollable power that both good and evil keep locked away for their collected protection. Once the Hollow is released, only the combined efforts of good and evil can recapture the Hollow and return it to its locked area for the protection of all mankind. This naturally made me to think of the locked room at the Ministry wherein, resides a force so great...Everyone knows the rest, I'm sure. (This room is locked for a reason, right?) The Charmed-Hollow could only be released and taken inward by a very powerful individual. This part also coincides with Harry being so full of the power the locked room holds, implying (to me) that he is the only one powerful enough to call on its powers. I think Harry may have already (unknowingly) called on these powers or Deathly Hollows before in a graveyard. Harry's description of the ghosts that came from the Priori Incantatum were more than just an echo, they also gave instructions and protected Harry long enough for him to get to the portkey. These echo's that had helped Harry were not what Dumbledore proposed them to be; they were more than just an echo of the spell regurgitated. My proposal therefore is: that the Deathly Hollows are good persons who were killed by evil; empty (hollow) of life; like death (deathly) but with ability beyond the boundaries of death because of the way in which their life was taken...who will be a powerful force that will protect Harry. Snow From fairwynn at hotmail.com Sat Feb 3 02:36:55 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 02:36:55 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164552 > Cassy: > So you don't subscribe to the view that it is Lily's *Potions* talent > inside that textbook? I find it curious that Slughorn (who taught them > all) repeatedly equates Harry with Lily (specifically mentioning her > creative brilliance), but compares him favourably to Snape: > > `But I don't think I've ever known such a natural at Potions! > Instinctive, you know ? like his mother! Well, then, it's natural > ability! I don't think even you, Severus ?` `Really?' said Snape > quietly, his eyes still boring into Harry, who felt a certain > disquiet.' (HBP15) > > In other words, Lily demonstrated the sort of imaginative instinct as > a Potioneer that even Snape lacked. And I think Hermione could be > right about a female mind at work, though wrong about the handwriting, > if Snape copied Lily or they collaborated in Potions. This is what > IMHO lends some retrospective poignancy to Snape's initial > interrogation of Harry in PS/SS, as if Snape was trying to find out > whether Harry was his mother's or his father's son. But as you say, > it's not canon (yet!) wynnleaf I just wanted to comment on this particular item (and I am reading your essays on your website, btw). In my experience, when someone is trying to explain how someone excels in an area, and then makes a comparison to another person, saying, "why even ______ couldn't do that!" what they are typically doing is making a comparison to the highest in that area, not someone only fairly good. So I read Slughorn's thought to be, more or less, "Harry is really talented! He must get it from Lily. Even Snape couldn't do some of the things Harry can!" Of course Slughorn would assume Harry got his "talent" from his mother, since she apparently had talent -- people always make those sorts of comparisons when a talented parent has a talented child in the same field. But the "even Snape couldn't do what Harry could do," sort of comment actually, as I understand it, places Snape's talent above Lily's. Slughorn does another "even you" when he talked about how well Harry did with his first attempt at Draught of Living Death. If Lily had done it as well as Harry, Slughorn could have said, "Harry did it as well as Lily did!" Or if Lily had produced a better DoLD than Snape, Slughorn could have said, "even Lily didn't do so well the first time around." But instead, Slughorn says, "even you, Severus..." which shows that Snape was the best potions student until Slughorn saw Harry's "talent." Naturally, when Slughorn saw Harry's "talent" he thought of Lily. Who else would he think of? It's not like Harry was going to inherit it from Snape, right? So all the comparisons are to Lily because Lily was Harry's mother and talent in potions. Now there are some things Harry does following the notes that make Slughorn think particularly of Snape. When Harry makes Draught to Produce Euphoria, Slughorn comments that the peppermint addition seems like the kind of creative thing Lily would have done. So we can infer that Lily was creative with potions. But when you actually look at the DtPE, what do we see? Many, many revisions. And the peppermint seems to get rid of any inconvenient outward signs of using the Draught. Sounds a lot more like something Snape might want as a teen -- a potion to produce happiness, where he wouldn't be seen to have any silly outward signs. Not something I'd picture Lily being interested in perfecting. wynnleaf From fairwynn at hotmail.com Sat Feb 3 02:48:38 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 02:48:38 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164553 > wynnleaf said > Now there are some things Harry does following the notes that make > Slughorn think particularly of Snape. When Harry makes Draught to > Produce Euphoria, Slughorn comments that the peppermint addition > seems like the kind of creative thing Lily would have done. So we > can infer that Lily was creative with potions. But when you > actually look at the DtPE, what do we see? Many, many revisions. > And the peppermint seems to get rid of any inconvenient outward > signs of using the Draught. Sounds a lot more like something Snape > might want as a teen -- a potion to produce happiness, where he > wouldn't be seen to have any silly outward signs. Not something I'd > picture Lily being interested in perfecting. wynnleaf, What a mess! I put the wrong name down. I said, "Now there are some things Harry does following the notes that make Slughorn think particularly of Snape." That should have been "make Slughorn think particularly of Lily." wynnleaf -- who needs to proofread better. From puduhepa98 at aol.com Sat Feb 3 04:09:54 2007 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 23:09:54 EST Subject: Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164554 >Steve/bboyminn It is unfair of us to take our reader's knowledge of 15 years of accumulated events and push that back in time demanding that Dumbledore weigh it all when he made his decision. It's just not possible for Dumbledore or anyone to have that level of foresight. Dumbledore made his decision based on his knowledge of past and current events that were available to him at the time. AT THE TIME, keeping Harry alive AT ANY COST was his number one priority. I say that each time he heard a report of the Dursley's /unpleasantness/ Dumbledore just kept reminding himself that Harry was safe and alive, and that soon enough he would be at Hogwarts, and the opportunity would exist to try to undo some of the damage that might have been done at the Dursleys. Nikkalmati Agreed that DD did not have a better alternative at the time he made his decision to place Harry at the Dursleys, according to what we have been told. I do not believe that DD could have known what the reaction of Petunia would be to having Harry to raise. Later, when he could have intervened, Harry still needed that blood protection and DD could not risk Harry losing it. I also do not believe DD knew what was going on at the Dursleys. Most of the theories critical of DD assume without any proof that DD was aware of the mistreatment Harry was suffering. I doubt that he did know. (The statement "I have watched you more closely than you could have imagined," refers only to Harry after he came to school, and is said to explain how DD discovered his love and admiration for HP). We have seen that wizards in general have a very sketchy idea of Muggle life. DD must have had Harry watched from the outside and we know about Mrs. Figg, but I do not think there was anything noticeably wrong from the outside, certainly not to a wizard. Most of the mistreatment of Harry is psychological. He is not loved and he is made to know that. He is told in the way he is treated that he is worthless. I don't think that kind of damage shows. Even the Muggles who saw him regularly did not notice anything wrong or they would have called Social Services. Harry was not the type to confide in Mrs. Figg. She was there primarily to watch for external enemies, I believe, but, if the treatment Harry received was obviously wrong, she would have noticed. Therefore, I do not hold DD responsible for placing Harry with Petunia or for not ensuring his good treatment. Nikkalmati >Steve/bboyminn >Note that Harry has his character flaws that can be attributed to having been raised at the Dursley, but overal, that experience has made him the selfless, courageous, and compassionate person he is today. What is that old sports saying...? "No harm, no foul" >Alla: >Sorry, but it can be said just as well that Harry is the person he is despite being raised at the Dursleys, not **because of that** IMO. >I do think that keeping Harry alive was the only reason to put him with Dursleys, but as I said many times I wish JKR would have shown blood protection in working. It would have been much more convincing to me, but unfortunately I am of the opinion that JKR came up with blood protection somewhere around writing GoF. IMO of course. >Alla, >Who thinks that Dumbledore should thank his lucky stars that Harry did not become another Tom Riddle or that he would not have been badly hurt when he was apparating on the roof, etc. Nikkalmati Most children who are brought up in homes without love suffer some kind of personality distortion in compensation, develop bitterness, or even outright neurosis. I agree that Harry, insofar as he is a boy of strength and character, has overcome his upbringing. If DD had known Harry was being mistreated, he was taking a big risk that Harry would become weak and unsure of himself or evil instead of compassionate and wise beyond his years. Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sat Feb 3 05:08:56 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 21:08:56 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: We have a release date In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702020939q5e08ba40ybf7c8625fa7843fa@mail.gmail.com> References: <948bbb470702020939q5e08ba40ybf7c8625fa7843fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2795713f0702022108u77c15560ta308200f086f668a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164555 Jeremiah: "Stand in line and buy the book or stand in line to see the movie... movie, book, movie, book. Why can't they have a 2 am showing! Oh, the turmoil!" Lynda: Or the scene my group of friends pictures. Us in line for the movie, our HP7's clasped firmly in our hands. No talking, as we're all READING while we wait for the theater to open so that we can all take our seats. That has all been removed from our heads of course, we will go to the movie on opening night and we will go to the book release party on the 20th... Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 09:21:07 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 09:21:07 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was:Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164556 --- "kibakianakaya" wrote: > > > > Alla: > > > > > > .... as I said many times I wish JKR would have > > > shown blood protection in working. It would have > > > been much more convincing to me, ... > > > > > > bboyminn: > > > > I'm not 100% convinced we won't see the last vestiges > > of the Blood Protection. .... I know the chance is > > slim, but I won't give up hope until I've read the > > last page and closed the book. > > > > For what it's worth. > > > > Steve/bboyminn > > > > Lilygale here: > There is canon suggesting that some type of blood > protection will last past Harry's 17th birthday. > "[Voldemort] didn't realize that love as powerful as > your mother's for you leaves it's own mark. ...sign > ...to have been loved so deeply, even though the > person who loved us is gone. will give us some > protection *forever*." (SS Scholastic ed pg 299, > my emphasis on forever). > > Don't know what it might be, but I would bet it has > something to do with that gleam in Dumbledore's eye. > I don't think that one has played out yet. > > Lilygale > bboyminn: This is to Lilygale and partly to Jeremiah. While I am aware that I am stating the obvious, it none the less is worth stating at this time. We are really dealing with two unique and separate protections here. Yes, they are related, but none the less separate. First, there is the protection Harry gained from Lily's sacrifice; let's call that "The Love Protection". Second, there is the additional protection that Dumbledore placed on Harry (and/or the Dursleys) that protects Harry while he lives in the place where his mother's bood dwells; in other words, while Harry lives at the Dursleys. Let's call that "The Blood Protection". The Blood Protection, as is indicated in the recent book, expires when Harry turns 17; when he becomes an adult in the wizard world. Lily's Love Protection, as far as I'm concerned and as is indicated by Lilygale's quote above, never expires. I believe Harry will always have that protection to some degree. As far as Voldemort using Harry's blood, that, in my opinion, has only overcome one small aspect of Lily's Love Protections. It has not erased it completely. As far as that maddening 'Gleam' in Dumbledore's eye, I think we can safely say that Dumbledore has seen some flaw in Voldemort's plan. Voldemort knew he would overcome some aspect of Lily's Protection, but there is surely another part that he hasn't planned on or allowed for. What it is though, I don't know? I sit here and ponder the possibilities, but as I said I really don't know. Perhaps by taking Harry's blood Voldemort has somehow extended the "Blood Protection". Now by some stretch, Lily's blood through Harry dwells in Voldemort. Perhaps, and this is very slim, because Voldemort only took Harry's blood a few years ago, maybe the expiration clock in the Blood Protection, began again at that time, or at least relative to Voldemort it did. That means in the final battle when Voldemort tries to kill Harry, the Blood Protection will rear it's ugly head and strike Voldemort down. Again, that is slim and unlikely speculation, but no worse the most of the rest of the explanations I've heard. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From trekkie at stofanet.dk Sat Feb 3 10:10:05 2007 From: trekkie at stofanet.dk (TrekkieGrrrl) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 11:10:05 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45C45F7D.2020302@stofanet.dk> No: HPFGUIDX 164557 Cassy: So you don't subscribe to the view that it is Lily's *Potions* talent inside that textbook? I find it curious that Slughorn (who taught them all) repeatedly equates Harry with Lily (specifically mentioning her creative brilliance), but compares him favourably to Snape: `But I don't think I've ever known such a natural at Potions! Instinctive, you know like his mother! Well, then, it's natural ability! I don't think even you, Severus ` `Really?' said Snape quietly, his eyes still boring into Harry, who felt a certain disquiet.' (HBP15) In other words, Lily demonstrated the sort of imaginative instinct as a Potioneer that even Snape lacked. And I think Hermione could be right about a female mind at work, though wrong about the handwriting, if Snape copied Lily or they collaborated in Potions. This is what IMHO lends some retrospective poignancy to Snape's initial interrogation of Harry in PS/SS, as if Snape was trying to find out whether Harry was his mother's or his father's son. But as you say, it's not canon (yet!) Trekkie: I see this more as Snape *knowing* that it wasn't really Lily who was the star pupil, rather than himself. And Snape even replies *quietly* - which isn't all that usual for him when he's feeling in the wrong. The "just shove a bezoar down their throat" rings for me so much of Snape. Typical Snapish sarcasm here. And *if* someone other than himself wrote in the book (of which I'm not at all convinced, he has changed many things about himself over time, why not his handwriting? MY handwriting is definitely VERY different from how I wrote when I was at school) - it could have been Snape dictating to Lily. Which doesn't mean that Lily came up with it all, it could well have been Snape's ideas all the time - and Lily taking the credit. And yes, some pupils CAN take the credit for other people's hard work for years, without the teacher ever noticing, especially if that teacher has said pupil as "pet pupil" already. I know. I did so myself when I was at school. I do think that the initial barrage of questions Snape submitted Harry to, in the very first Potions Class is a mix of the two. He's probably testing Harry's klnowledge, both of Potions in particular but also of the WW in general, and is probably apalled to find that Harry knows *nothing*. Snape dislikes what he deems to be stupidity, and he sees Harry as ignorant. At this point most likely without knowing Harry's background. He sees a James-clone walk into his classroom and is convinced that Harry has no redeeming qualities (like a knowledge of Potions) whatsoever. Unjust for sure, but then, Snape *is not* a nice man. IMO he's without a doubt DDM!Snape, but that doesn't make him into a nice fluffybunny - quite the contrary. ~Trekkie From cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com Sat Feb 3 11:53:31 2007 From: cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com (Unspeakable) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 11:53:31 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164558 No worries. :-) wynleaf says: In my experience, when someone is trying to explain how someone excels in an area, and then makes a comparison to another person, saying, "why even ______ couldn't do that!" what they are typically doing is making a comparison to the highest in that area, not someone only fairly good. So I read Slughorn's thought to be, more or less, "Harry is really talented! He must get it from Lily. Even Snape couldn't do some of the things Harry can!" Of course Slughorn would assume Harry got his "talent" from his mother, since she apparently had talent -- people always make those sorts of comparisons when a talented parent has a talented child in the same field. But the "even Snape couldn't do what Harry could do," sort of comment actually, as I understand it, places Snape's talent above Lily's. Cassy: Good point! However, I would counter that Slughorn is not *spontaneously* saying to Harry, "why even Severus Snape couldn't do that!", which would have been more persuasive, IMHO. Instead, he's meeting Snape at a party and raving about Harry's brilliance in the discipline that Snape used to teach. (Though it's worth noting that Snape seems to prefer DADA to Potions!) Indeed, Slughorn, benign and generous, tries to include Snape in his praise of Harry... (& I doubt he'd have mentioned Snape's name at all if Snape hadn't just walked past). Here's the scene again: "Ah, Sybill, we all think our subject's most important!" said a loud voice, and Slughorn appeared at Professor Trelawney's other side, his face very red, his velvet hat a little askew, a glass of mead in one hand and an enormous mince pie in the other. "But I don't think I've ever known such a natural at Potions!" said Slughorn, regarding Harry with a fond, if bloodshot, eye. "Instinctive, you know?like his mother! I've only ever taught a few with this kind of ability, I can tell you that, Sybill?why even Severus ?" And to Harry's horror, Slughorn threw out an arm and seemed to scoop Snape out of thin air toward them. "Stop skulking and come and join us, Severus!" hiccuped Slughorn happily. "I was just talking about Harry's exceptional potion-making! Some credit must go to you, of course, you taught him for five years!" Trapped, with Slughorn's arm around his shoulders, Snape looked down his hooked nose at Harry, his black eyes narrowed. "Funny, I never had the impression that I managed to teach Potter anything at all." "Well, then, it's natural ability!" shouted Slughorn. "You should have seen what he gave me, first lesson, Draught of Living Death?never had a student produce finer on a first attempt, I don't think even you, Severus ?" "Really?" said Snape quietly, his eyes still boring into Harry, who felt a certain disquiet. The last thing he wanted was for Snape to start investigating the source of his newfound brilliance at Potions. (HBP15) wynleaf: Slughorn does another "even you" when he talked about how well Harry did with his first attempt at Draught of Living Death. If Lily had done it as well as Harry, Slughorn could have said, "Harry did it as well as Lily did!" Or if Lily had produced a better DoLD than Snape, Slughorn could have said, "even Lily didn't do so well the first time around." But instead, Slughorn says, "even you, Severus..." which shows that Snape was the best potions student until Slughorn saw Harry's "talent." Cassy: But as I read it, Snape *is* effectively saying, "Harry did it as well as Lily did!" (Albeit, Harry is even more of a prodigy because he apparently did it the first time!) Harry's talent is "instinctive ... like his mother"; Slughorn has "only ever taught a few with this kind of [natural] ability"; "not even Severus..." etc. could do as well as Harry and (by implication) Lily. Only Lily's not around any more... unlike Snape. wynleaf: Naturally, when Slughorn saw Harry's "talent" he thought of Lily. Who else would he think of? It's not like Harry was going to inherit it from Snape, right? So all the comparisons are to Lily because Lily was Harry's mother and talented in potions. Cassy: Very true! :-) But Slughorn raved about Lily even before he had seen Harry perform in a Potions lesson & the whole tenor of his remarks makes it difficult for me to accept that Good-at-Potions-Lily was still second best to Snape. She was funny, brave and charming (Cheeky!Lily) but she was also highly gifted, IMHO... & what Slughorn seems to recognize in Harry is Lily's creative *style* which seems to fit with her intuitive, empathetic personality. "Hmpf. Yes, well. You shouldn't have favorites as a teacher, of course, but she was one of mine. Your mother," Slughorn added, in answer to Harry's questioning look. "Lily Evans. One of the brightest I ever taught." (HBP4) "Excellent, excellent, Harry! Good lord, its clear you've inherited your mother's talent. She was a dab hand at Potions, Lily was!" (HBP9) "That's the individual spirit a real potion-maker needs!" said Slughorn happily "Just like his mother, she had the same intuitive grasp of potion-making, it's undoubtedly from Lily he gets it And an extra ten points to Gryffindor for sheer cheek!" (HBP18) "Well, now, this looks absolutely wonderful," said Slughorn ... "Euphoria, I take it? And what's that I smell? Mmmm ... you've added just a sprig of peppermint, haven't you? Unorthodox, but what a stroke of inspiration, Harry, of course, that would tend to counterbalance the occasional side effects of excessive singing and nose-tweaking. ... I really don't know where you get these brain waves, my boy ... unless ... it's just your mother's genes coming out in you!" (HBP22) For me all this *has* to be more significant... Cassy V. http://book7.co.uk/ From nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com Sat Feb 3 16:10:57 2007 From: nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com (ereshkigal_doom) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 16:10:57 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hollows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164559 Snow: > I've been thinking since the title had been released what or where > the Deathly Hollows could be, as have we all. There have been many > great suggestions some of which have led me to my own far-fetched > thinking well...that and a bit of Charmed (the series). > > In Charmed, the Hollow is an enormous and uncontrollable power > that both good and evil keep locked away for their collected > protection. ereshkigal_doom: Sorry to be a smart-arse, but the book is entitled "The Deathly Hallows". Does this invalidate your theory or am I just not following your argument somehow? A 'hallow' is a holy thing as in the line from the Lord's Prayer: "Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name ...." or "Halloween" (according to Wikipedia, this is the short form of All-hallow-even which means the eve before All Hallow's Day, more modernly known as All Saints Day which means the same thing.) So a hallowed thing is a thing that is holy. ereshkigal_doom From belviso at attglobal.net Sat Feb 3 18:21:50 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 13:21:50 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 References: Message-ID: <007201c747c0$2d114d30$84ba400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164560 Cassy: Very true! :-) But Slughorn raved about Lily even before he had seen Harry perform in a Potions lesson & the whole tenor of his remarks makes it difficult for me to accept that Good-at-Potions-Lily was still second best to Snape. She was funny, brave and charming (Cheeky!Lily) but she was also highly gifted, IMHO... & what Slughorn seems to recognize in Harry is Lily's creative *style* which seems to fit with her intuitive, empathetic personality. "Hmpf. Yes, well. You shouldn't have favorites as a teacher, of course, but she was one of mine. Your mother," Slughorn added, in answer to Harry's questioning look. "Lily Evans. One of the brightest I ever taught." (HBP4) "Excellent, excellent, Harry! Good lord, its clear you've inherited your mother's talent. She was a dab hand at Potions, Lily was!" (HBP9) "That's the individual spirit a real potion-maker needs!" said Slughorn happily . "Just like his mother, she had the same intuitive grasp of potion-making, it's undoubtedly from Lily he gets it .And an extra ten points to Gryffindor for sheer cheek!" (HBP18) "Well, now, this looks absolutely wonderful," said Slughorn ... "Euphoria, I take it? And what's that I smell? Mmmm ... you've added just a sprig of peppermint, haven't you? Unorthodox, but what a stroke of inspiration, Harry, of course, that would tend to counterbalance the occasional side effects of excessive singing and nose-tweaking. ... I really don't know where you get these brain waves, my boy ... unless ... it's just your mother's genes coming out in you!" (HBP22) For me all this *has* to be more significant... Magpie: But isn't it already significant? Slughorn's *wrong* in what he's saying about Harry. He thinks he's a dab hand at Potions when he's not--he's cribbing off Snape. I see no evidence whatsoever that the work in the book is Lily's instead of Snape's--in fact, that effectively destroys one of the most important points of HBP. Harry was no longer bonding with a young boy he identified with who turned out to be Snape. It was more like he was crushing on his mother. Slughorn's actually not a very good judge of character. It's not that he's always wrong, but he's blatantly biased and has his head turned by things. He loved Lily and thought her great at all things, and that included Potions. He gets carried away. He's now enamored of Harry and fawning over him in all things--everyone in the class knows that Harry's up to something, but Slughorn's crowing about what a genius he "obviously" is when he's not. It's not just that Harry's doing such a good job of fooling him; Slughorn's also predisposed to give Harry positive attention. (That's another ironic thing about his class--Snape's the one with the rep for unfairness, but Slughorn actually tops him, alienating most of the class.) That's not to say Lily wasn't good at Potions and that she and Snape couldn't ever have worked together so that she is connected to the book. But taking the HBP's work and ascribing it to Lily is too much for me. It makes the whole relationship between Harry and Snape in HBP through the book pointless--oh, it wasn't really a meeting of the minds between Harry and his enemy Snape, because phew! It was Harry's sainted Mummy all along. I guess that's why it surprises me that this theory seems to get put forward more than the opposite theory, that perhaps Lily came by her great rep as a Potions maker the way Harry did, through Snape. I'm not saying this has to be true, but I hear far more often that Slughorn's comments about Lily are reason to suspect it was Snape who was just writing down her stuff in his book or letting her write in his book, when Snape's the character we actually *see* being a dab hand at Potions and being interested in school and all that. His handwriting is, iirc, described in similar terms on his DADA exam. And the book is full of crossouts, iirc, indicating he's working as he goes along, not copying. Perhaps most importantly, Snape angrily claims credit for the book at the end--James stole *his* spells to use against him--the very spells written in the book. -m From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 19:05:04 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 19:05:04 -0000 Subject: Lupin and DD's Headmastership; (wasESE!McGonagall (not what you think)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164561 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, puduhepa98 at ... wrote: > > > Carol > What happened, IMO, is that the headmaster, Armando Dippet, died > suddenly in December the asstant headmaster and Transfiguration > teacher Albus Dumbledore took over the position, leaving the > Transfiguration job open, so McGonagall got the job. (I > realize that this interpretation doesn't fit with Lupin's story, > > but it does fit with the HBP timeline for Tom Riddle's) > Nikkalmati: > > > Lets say Lupin was bitten at the age of 5, just about 1955, when > DD became headmaster. Mike: I also agree with Carol's interpretation of the timeline. I'd like to put just a little finer point on the discussion and to clear up Nikkalmati's dates above. I think that Voldemort's second interview to which Carol refers happened in the winter of '56-'57. This makes it "39 years this December" for McGonnagall in the fall of '95.It also gives Tom Riddle approx a year and a half at Borgin and Burkes (he disappears late in '46) and then reappears for the interview ten years after the Hepzibah Smith incident, per Dumbledore's timeline in the "Lord Voldemort's Request" chapter of HBP. BTW, I have the Marauders and Snape being born in late '57 or pre- Sept of '58. That puts them starting school no-earlier-than '69 to ensure that Molly has already graduated. (You know, the whole Whomping Willow not being there when she was thing from GoF). > Nikkalmati: > His family would have assumed, based on past practice, that he > could not go to Hogwarts, because no one yet would have been aware > of DD's tendencies to allow everyone the same opportunities. They > may not have been aware until Lupin received his letter from > Hogwarts 6 years later that he would be invited, or, if they > expected the invitation they were surprised when they discussed > the situation with DD that he was willing to make "accommodations" Mike: This also was Red Hen's take on the situation (or rather the method of "accommodating" JKR's bad maths) to which I concur. Besides, as I believe you so eloquently atated once before, we should be careful of how accurate anything Lupin says ("out numbered 20 to 1") because half of it is cheese blintz. (I still LOL at that line) Mike, going to the kitchen to make a cheese blintz and see if he can talk like Lupin :D From fairwynn at hotmail.com Sat Feb 3 19:15:14 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 19:15:14 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164562 > Cassy: > But as I read it, Snape *is* effectively saying, "Harry did it as well > as Lily did!" (Albeit, Harry is even more of a prodigy because he > apparently did it the first time!) Harry's talent is "instinctive ... > like his mother"; Slughorn has "only ever taught a few with this kind > of [natural] ability"; "not even Severus..." etc. could do as well as > Harry and (by implication) Lily. Only Lily's not around any more... > unlike Snape. wynnleaf Regardless of your arguments, I cannot recall ever hearing someone use the "this person is *even* better than ______" without intending that the second person had been the best, and now the new person is. Therefore, in spite of your analysis of Slughorn (which I will in part disagree with below), I find it hard to believe that JKR would use that phrase *twice* and not mean that the person compared to used to be the best, but now Harry is. Now as regards Slughorns opinion -- whatever they are... Slughorn is teaching 6th year potions and having the students use the instructions straight out of the book. Snape had typically written instructions on the board. Clearly, the revisions in the HBP potions books are *better* than the textbook instructions. In fact, not even Hermione can produce a perfect result using the textbook instructions. However, in earlier years, Hermione regularly produced perfect results using Snape's instructions on the board. It seems that Slughorn does not realize that the instructions are inferior and produce inferior results. He doesn't give added instructions to students that would enable a top student like Hermione (who does excellently with Snape's instructions), to produce perfect potions. So right off, it looks like Snape knows his potions better than Slughorn, and gives better instructions to his class. Hermione, after all, could be considered the "test case," since she's a superb student and only began achieving less-than-perfect results when she followed the textbook instructions that to which Slughorn ascribed. On the other hand, Harry, using notes written in Snape's (the self- proclaimed HBP) notebook, achieves excellent results. Sounds to me like it's the instructions that Snape wrote on the board that has made it possible for Hermione to achieve perfect results in the past. Under Slughorn, the extra material from Snape isn't there, so she does worse. Harry, who pays far more attention to the notes in the HBP potions book than he did Snape's classroom instructions in previous years, also achieves perfect results -- just like Hermione in year's past. Snape's instructions in class led to perfect results for Hermione. Without those notes, she did worse. Snape's notes in the HBP book led to perfect results for Harry. Likely conclusion: Snape either wrote the notes in the HBP potions book or all of his instructions in each year of classes he taught were Lily's creations. No, I don't think so, he couldn't be using Lily's revisions for all of his teaching -- that just stretches believability too far. Besides, we also see Snape's creativity in making new spells written in the book. So he was uncreative in potions, but creative in spells? I doubt it, since we *know* he's an excellent potions maker and creativity tends to be a characteristic that carries across all of a person's talent areas. Last, I agree with Magpie that a big part of HBP is Harry's finding that he likes and sort of bonds with the writer of the notes -- the Half Blood Prince. And the title of the book is HP and the Half Blood Prince. To discover that the HBP that Harry comes to know and like in the book was really mostly Lily, completely breaks down what's going on in the book -- not the plot, but those wonderful literary parallels and pictures. What, exactly, would be the literary point in Lily creating those potions revisions?? Harry needs to learn what? That Snape took credit for his mom's creations? Where would that get us? More reasons to hate Snape, which Harry's got quite enough of -- JKR doesn't need to add some more. Or is this supposed to show what great friends they were? So Snape credited himself with her work because he liked her? No -- doesn't work for me. I just don't see a point to Lily being the author of the notes. In my opinion, the evidence is actually pointing to two people who were both highly talented in potions and probably had some sort of connection, possibly friendship, but not that Snape got those revisions from Lily. wynnleaf From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 20:11:46 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 20:11:46 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164563 zgirnius wrote: > Personally, I think Snape may have warned James personally, or through Potter, that Voldemort had subverted his Secret Keeper. Peter was, apparently, the SK for a week, so Voldemort did not act immediately, which leaves more time for leaks (hypothetically) to have happened. I don't think Snape had specific information about Sirius: I think it was more that he knew 1) the Fidelius had been cast, and 2) Voldemort was convinced he could find the Potters, and deduced 3) Sirius was a traitor, because the whole point of the switch was to tell everyone Sirius was the SK. > Carol responds: But how *could* Snape have warned James personally? (And by "Potter," do you mean Dumbledore?) Snape wouldn't have been able to find James after the Fidelius Charm had been cast (and certainly PP would not have told him the Secret). If he did try to warn him, it must have been to tell him not to make Black his Secret Keeper. But then James would have known that Snape was a Death Eater. Would he have believed that Snape had changed sides and was spying for Dumbledore? I seriously doubt it. Maybe he could have reported it as a rumor he heard from his Death Eater friends. But I think it's more likely that Snape is referring to the warning *Dumbledore* gave James when he offered himself as Secret Keeper, to which James responded, in essence, "Thanks, but I trust Sirius with my life. If we have a Secret Keeper, it will be him." Assuming that Dumbledore shared this information with Snape, it would explain both Snape's belief that James was too arrogant not to realize that he was mistaken in Black and Dumbledore's testimony that Black was the Secret Keeper. If Lily was present and made clear that she shared James's sentiments, Dumbledore was doubly convinced. I really don't think that Snape would have exposed himself to insult and rejection by confronting James himself. The last thing he'd want James to know was that he had any contact with Voldemort. And we know that Black didn't know Snape had been a Death Eater. If James had known, surely he would have told his best friend and SK. Also, Dumbledore was trying to protect Snape. The last thing he would have done is to reveal the identity of his own spy to any Order member, least of all Snape's Hogwarts enemies (or a potential traitor close to the Potters). I think Snape knew only that someone close to the Potters was revealing information about them to Voldemort and he assumed that the spy was Black, who had (in his view) tried to murder him when he was sixteen. His suspicions would have been confirmed when he was "proven" right by the betrayal and murder of the Potters (he "knew" that the SK and therefore the traitor was Sirius Black) and the subsequent "murder" of Peter Pettigrew. I think that Snape cherished his rightness, and his righteous anger against Sirius Black, for twelve years, which explains his belief that Black was trying to murder Harry (seemingly confirmed by the attacks on the Fat Lady and Ron's bedcurtains), his anger when HRH were "foolish" enough to listen to werewolf! Lupin, accomplice to the convicted murderer, and his fury when Black escaped. Anyway, I very much doubt that Snape approached James himself. I think that Dumbledore approached James on Snape's information about an unknown spy close to the Potters (whom Snape assumed to be Black), offered himself as SK to prevent an act of treachery by the so-called friend, and was rejected. But Snape clearly didn't know the identity of the spy any more than he knew that WPP were Animagi. I think only the closest inner circle of DEs, or maybe only Bellatrix, knew. After Voldemort's vaporization, she recruited her most loyal followers to look for him. She must have told them about Wormtail then, and they screamed about Wormtail's treachery till exposure to the Dementors silenced them. If the identity of the spy were common knowledge among the DEs, Snape would have known it, too. But Voldemort, like Dumbledore, tells his subordinates only what they need to know, and the identity of his spy was the last thing he would tell them. I'm also not sure about any "leaks." It's not clear why Wormtail didn't act immediately. Maybe he wanted to make himself look trustworthy for a little while. Maybe he needed to get up the nerve to betray his friends. Maybe he just didn't have the opportunity because Black was watching him to keep him safe. PP may have told Voldemort of the plan before the charm was actually placed, that Black was going to be the SK, and then gone to him again to reveal that he was the one. Or maybe he told Voldemort immediately and Voldemort, being superstitious, wanted to wait until Halloween. But at any rate, I think only a very few people even knew there was a Secret Keeper, and of those who did, only the Potters, Sirius Black, and Pettigrew himself actually knew the Secret--until PP revealed it to Voldemort. I think that Dumbledore and Snape knew *about* it, but they certainly were not told the Secret itself or they would have known who the SK was. And that would have spoiled Peter Pettigrew's plan to betray his friends. I agree with most of the last part of your post (that Snape knew that the Fidelius charm would be cast and that Voldemort was looking for the Potters based on information that someone close to the Potters had given him) but I think he "knew" that SB was the Secret Keeper because DD had told him. Why in the world would the Potters want the Fidelius Charm to be public knowledge or to endanger their friend Sirius Black by having the general public, and therefore the DEs, thinking that he was the Secret Keeper? The whole point of a Fidelius Charm is to keep a Secret secret. The fewer people who even know that such a charm has been placed, the safer they will be. (Even Lupin seems only to have been told of the SK *plan.* He wasn't informed of the switch and consequently, he wasn't in on the Secret, which explains why he didn't show up at Godric's Hollow or join Sirius in going after Peter.) Just why it took so long to cast the spell is unclear since Snape's information had to be obtained before he joined the Hogwarts staff in September. Maybe Lily had to study the Charm and practice it before she could cast it properly? Maybe that's why she needed a second wand? (See Ollivander's reference to her "first wand" in SS/PS). Or maybe they wanted to test their friends loyalty to figure out whom they could trust with the Secret once the spell was cast? Maybe they were keeping an eye on Lupin? Waiting until the third week of October has never made sense to me, nor do I see why it's necessary to the plot (except to enable the Potters to be murdered on Halloween). Carol, who used to think that Black was the original SK but now thinks that PP was the only one From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 21:01:46 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 21:01:46 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164564 argentumangela wrote: > As for not trying to kill Harry before GoF, I believe he did try though only indirectly. In GoF, one could argue that he was drunk with his own power and so tried to eliminate the one who had first vanquished him. But he hasn't tried to do so directly again, if you will notice in OoTP and HBP. Both encounters weren't direct attacks on Harry. Carol responds: Both in SS/PS and GoF, Voldemort tries to kill Harry directly, which certainly disposes of the idea that Voldie deliberately made Harry a Horcrux. There's no question in my mind that Voldie wants the Prophecy Boy dead in those two books as surely as he did at Godric's Hollow. His actions also make it clear that *if* Harry (or his scar) is a Horcrux, Voldie doesn't know it at this point. Nor does this attitude change in OoP. He fires a number of AKs at Harry, which don't kill him only because Dumbledore is manipulating the statues from the fountain to block the curses. And, failing in that effort, he possesses Harry and tempts Dumbledore to kill Harry in order to kill him (as if DD would do such a thing even if he didn't know about the Horcruxes). So it seems to me that he still wants Harry dead. He just got sidetracked onto the Prophecy in OoP because he thought it might give him information on how to kill Harry. (He still doesn't know the part about "he will have power the Dark Lord knows not" and "he will mark him as his equal," etc.) In HBP, he's sidetracked on revenge against Lucius Malfoy via Draco and against Dumbledore for defeating him in the MoM. Draco's mission, for him, is a win-win proposition. Either Draco fails and is killed for his failure, giving Lucius a lesson in the Dark Lord's power and ruthlessness, or Draco somehow succeeds in getting DEs into Hogwarts and Dumbledore is overpowered and killed whether Draco commits the murder himself or not. (And if he does, Voldemort has a new, loyal DE to take Lucius Malfoy's place.) No doubt Snape fits in there, too. But basically, Harry Potter can wait a year, till Dumbledore is out of the way and Snape (whom Voldie would soon learn is the DADA teacher, not the Potions master) is out of Hogwarts and at his side. (No doubt Dumbledore was rather pleased by this change in focus; better him than Harry.) Anyway, Snape's words to the DEs ring true even though he clearly was not in on the Vanishing Cabinet plan (and even though, in my view, Snape was keeping the DEs from Crucioing Harry because he's DDM): "He's for the Dark Lord." IOW, Voldie still wants Harry dead, but (conveniently for DDM!Snape) he wants to do it himself. Surely, if it were possible to create an accidental Horcrux, Voldemort would by now suspect what had happened. He knows about the blood protection that protected Harry and vaporized him; he knows that Harry has escaped him four times (not counting CoS with Diary!Tom); he now has Harry's blood in his veins and thinks that he shares the blood protection, which gives him more, not less, reason to want to kill Harry in GoF (and again in OoP); he knows about the mind connection provided by the scar; he almost certainly knows that Harry is a Parseltongue (either Lucius Malfoy, whose source of information would be Draco, or Snape in his role as double agent would have told him). If such powers and such a connection could be conferred by a soul bit inside Harry's scar, surely Voldie would have figured that out by now? And if such a soul bit could have entered Harry and made him a Horcrux despite the absence of an encasing spell, surely he'd have stopped trying to kill Harry by now? I'm betting that Voldemort, having brought about the murder of Harry's protector, the only one he ever feared, will try to kill Harry himself the moment the blood protection expires at 00:01, August 1. (He'll fail, of course, or there'd be no seventh book.) Carol, who just thought of a FILK idea, to be sung by Voldemort, that a Harry!Horcrux supporter may want to attempt: "Just you wait, Harry Horcrux, just you wait!" (Too bad 'e doesn't 'ave a Cockney accent) From percafluvia at gmx.net Sat Feb 3 20:31:13 2007 From: percafluvia at gmx.net (laperchette) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 20:31:13 -0000 Subject: Hermes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164565 Have you read about Rowlings "vandalism"? She wrote the message "JK Rowling finished writing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in this room (652) on 11th Jan 2007" on the backside of a statue in her hotel-room. Now, perhaps it's only a canard. But the symbolism is actually pretty cool. The cross sum of 652 is 13 :) And the statue is the god Hermes. The god of messages (Percy's owl has the name Hermes), of poetry, of magic, of cunning, and thieves and liars. The Name Hermione strongly related to Hermes. Also hermeneutic the art of decipher hidden meanings. His element is mercury. Then Hermes Trismegistus is the inventor of Alchemy! So when the articles it's true I'm even surer, that we can expect a huge plot-twist. :) laperchette From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 22:15:02 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 22:15:02 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164566 > Carol responds: > But how *could* Snape have warned James personally? (And by "Potter," > do you mean Dumbledore?) zgirnius: Oops, yes, I mean through Dumbledore! >Carol: > Snape wouldn't have been able to find James > after the Fidelius Charm had been cast (and certainly PP would not > have told him the Secret). zgirnius: As I understand it, the FC protected the Potters at home. If James or Lily left for whatever reason, I presume people would see them. (Without being able to follow them home, naturally - neither James nor Lily were the SK). And one place/reason I could see James leaving occasionally would be to meet Dumbledore or Order members. > Carol: > But then James > would have known that Snape was a Death Eater. zgirnius: Yes, he would. Or, at least, that Snape claimed to be one. This is not, as far as I can see, a problem with my proposal, since James died shortly after learning this information. Carol: > Would he have believed > that Snape had changed sides and was spying for Dumbledore? I > seriously doubt it. Maybe he could have reported it as a rumor he > heard from his Death Eater friends. zgirnius: The point of my idea is that of course, James would not believe Snape. He would be sure he was right about his friends. He would have 'died, too arrogant to believe he could be mistaken in Black'. > Carol: > But I think it's more likely that > Snape is referring to the warning *Dumbledore* gave James when he > offered himself as Secret Keeper, to which James responded, in > essence, "Thanks, but I trust Sirius with my life. If we have a Secret > Keeper, it will be him." Assuming that Dumbledore shared this > information with Snape, it would explain both Snape's belief that > James was too arrogant not to realize that he was mistaken in Black > and Dumbledore's testimony that Black was the Secret Keeper. zgirnius: Sure, Dumbledore could have told him all that. And Snape would probably still have been steamed about it. There's just something personal-seeming, to me, about Snape's reactions in the Shack that makes me suspect there is more to it. Of course, it could also be all about Lily, or years spent mulling it all over... > Carol: > I really don't think that Snape would have exposed himself to insult > and rejection by confronting James himself. The last thing he'd want > James to know was that he had any contact with Voldemort. zgirnius: All the more reason for resentment later, if he did so expose himself and was disregarded. It's the last thing he'd want, but I see him as someone who would also have felt obligated to do it anyway. (Since he accepts his own responsibility for putting the Potters in danger in the first place). The shakier part of my idea (in my own opinion) is whether Snape would have had an opportunity to 1) get new information suggesting the chosen SK was a bad apple, and 2) see James. >Carol: > And we know > that Black didn't know Snape had been a Death Eater. If James had > known, surely he would have told his best friend and SK. zgirnius: One way around this is if Potter died before he saw Sirius and had a chance to talk to him. The hypothetical conversation with Snape could not have happened any earlier than Peter became SK. Snape could also have asked James not to tell anyone else. Would James have disregarded such a request? I couldn't say, I feel we know so little about him. Carol: > Also, > Dumbledore was trying to protect Snape. The last thing he would have > done is to reveal the identity of his own spy to any Order member, > least of all Snape's Hogwarts enemies (or a potential traitor close to > the Potters). zgirnius: If the message was conveyed via Dumbledore, I agree, he would not have named his source (other than, that it was a reliable 'useful spy'). If Snape found an opportunity to confront Potter directly, Dumbledore would not be involved. > Carol: >Why in the world would the Potters want the Fidelius > Charm to be public knowledge or to endanger their friend Sirius Black > by having the general public, and therefore the DEs, thinking that he > was the Secret Keeper? zgirnius: I was not suggesting they were planning to advertise it. Merely that the point of the switch WAS to tell those who would know about the FC, that their SK was Black. Which, we both agree, could have included Snape (via Dumbledore). >Carol: >(Even Lupin seems only to have > been told of the SK *plan.* He wasn't informed of the switch and > consequently, he wasn't in on the Secret, which explains why he didn't > show up at Godric's Hollow or join Sirius in going after Peter.) zgirnius: And illustrates my point. All who knew there was a Secret, were told Black was its Keeper. I presume the only people who knew the whole truth were the Potters, Sirius, and Peter (until he told Voldemort). I do think they must have been planning to use notes, or something of the sort, for Peter to communicate the secret to friends the Potters wished to enable to visit them. Because they did plan to keep Peter's role a secret, which means either they would never allow anyone to know the secret, or they envisioned a means of communicating IT without revealing Peter's involvement. > Carol: > Just why it took so long to cast the spell is unclear since Snape's > information had to be obtained before he joined the Hogwarts staff in > September. zgirnius: Not necessarily. Surely teachers occasionally leave campus, on evenings or weekends when they are not on duty? We know Dumbledore does. I can't imagine he forbids the staff to do so as well. From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 22:21:46 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 22:21:46 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164567 > Carol: > Surely, if it were possible to create an accidental Horcrux, Voldemort > would by now suspect what had happened. He knows about the blood > protection that protected Harry and vaporized him; he knows that Harry > has escaped him four times (not counting CoS with Diary!Tom); he now > has Harry's blood in his veins and thinks that he shares the blood > protection, which gives him more, not less, reason to want to kill > Harry in GoF (and again in OoP); he knows about the mind connection > provided by the scar; he almost certainly knows that Harry is a > Parseltongue (either Lucius Malfoy, whose source of information would > be Draco, or Snape in his role as double agent would have told him). > If such powers and such a connection could be conferred by a soul bit > inside Harry's scar, surely Voldie would have figured that out by now? > And if such a soul bit could have entered Harry and made him a Horcrux > despite the absence of an encasing spell, surely he'd have stopped > trying to kill Harry by now? Annemehr: I think it is quite possible LV does already know that Harry is a Horcrux. He may have discovered or confirmed it at the end of OoP while he was possessing Harry, if it is possible for him to detect a detached piece of his own soul when he's in direct contact with it. (It may not be possible. As we know, he apparently did not detect the destruction of the diary Hx and had to be told, so it's hard to say whether he could detect a soul bit even if it's right under his nose.) If LV did detect a bit of himself in Harry that night, he had no time to do anything about it before he was ejected by Harry's emotion for Sirius. Or, as you say, he may have added up the evidence and come to the same conclusion. If LV does know that Harry is a Horcrux, why would that in itself make him hesitate to kill him? He still has his other, intentional, Horcruxes, and Harry is still, as far as LV knows, the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord -- and there's probably not much point in keeping around a Horcrux that's liable to vanquish you. As we see, LV has in fact made no more attempts to kill Harry since the possession foray, and has forbidden his DEs to try as well, even if presented with a golden opportunity. I don't think that has anything to do with Harry being a Horcrux (if LV is even aware of that), but rather: 1)before making his next attempt, LV first moved to eliminate Harry's protector, Dumbledore, and 2)since Harry has bested LV numerous times, no mere DE can be allowed to outshine him by doing the deed. Of course, *later on* in DH, maybe Voldemort will be horrified to discover that all the Hxes he made are destroyed and the only one he has left is the one he never intended to have at all -- Harry himself. And as I've said before, I'm going with Talisman's theory that Harry is no accidental Horcrux, but made by DD himself with the soul bit torn from LV at Lily's murder. (Yes, I know. "Dumbledore would never do that." We'll see.) Carol: > I'm betting that Voldemort, having brought about the murder of Harry's > protector, the only one he ever feared, will try to kill Harry himself > the moment the blood protection expires at 00:01, August 1. (He'll > fail, of course, or there'd be no seventh book.) Oh, I have been looking forward to his appearance in Privet Drive for a long, long time! Annemehr counting the days... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 22:42:20 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 22:42:20 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164568 cassyvablatsky wrote: > > Hi, Carol. > > Thanks for taking the trouble to reply in detail. :-) > my attempt at a (reasonably) comprehensive, supported overview can be found online at the link cited below (won't mention this again - but I'd love to know what you make of it...). Carol responds: You're welcome. I did glance at the page and copy the links to a file, but it will be twelve years (well, a long time) before I can give them my full attention. Next time I'm between editing projects, the list is slow, and the neighbors' washing machine isn't leaking into my apartment . . . . :-) > Cassy: > Even allowing for 'the Harry filter', though, I am struck by the immaturity of Snape's behaviour and the main reason I cite jealousy as a probable motivation here is that Snape's chief outburst comes when Dumbledore is being particularly supportive & affectionate towards Harry after the Quidditch match: > > 'As Gryffindors came spilling onto the field, he saw Snape land nearby, white-faced and tight-lipped -- then Harry felt a hand on his shoulder and looked up into Dumbledore's smiling face. ... Snape spat bitterly on the ground.' (PS/SS13) Carol: I've always wondered about that uncouth little demonstration, which is not at all in keeping with snape's usual demeanor. True, he loses his head and starts yelling on about three occasions (CAPSLOCK!SNAPE), but usually, he's coolly sarcastic, sweeping around the room, quelling his students with a look, speaking in a quietly dangerous voice, etc. Some posters consider this bit of immaturity, to use your word, as an indication of Snape's working-class background coming through, but I'm not so sure that Spinner's End is really his childhood home, and we don't see any other signs of such a background. (Mild swearing, as in "I don't give a damn about that wretched Poltergeist" and "What the [hell]?" is hardly confined to the residents of industrial cities. Lord Byron, anyone?) It's interesting, however, that the only other person we see spitting angrily on the ground (or was it at Dumbledore?) is Karkaroff when Harry is awarded more points than Krum at the second task. So, clearly, Snape is displeased, but I'm not sure that we can judge his reason for being so from the Harry-filtered context. Let's think about why Snape is acting as referee. The other teachers (except Quirrell) think that he's trying to give Hufflepuff an unfair advantage over Gryffindor, so naturally he'd be upset that Harry caught the Snitch so quickly. (Possibly Harry thinks so, too, at this point.) That Snape spits just as Dumbledore smiles and puts his hand on Harry's shoulder is probably just coincidence like his looking into Harry's eyes just as Voldemort is also looking at him through the back of Quirrell's head. (It's Voldie, not Snape, who's causing the scar to hurt, but that's not how it looks to Harry or the reader.) So, what is Snape trying to accomplish by refereeing the game? According to Quirrell, he's trying to prevent another attack on Harry (or thwart it if it happens). Is Snape disappointed that Quirrell didn't publicly reveal himself as an attempted murderer and that he, Snape, didn't get a chance to publicly rescue Harry? That seems a bit out of character for Snape, who wouldn't want the Slytherins to see him saving Harry. Was he trying to prove to Dumbledore that Quirrell is dangerous? (DD is present at this game, as he was not for the first one.) I don't know what's up with Snape here, but I don't believe that it's jealousy of DD's affection for Harry any more than I believe Lupin's claim that young Severus was jealous of James's prowess on the Quidditch pitch. There's not a shred of evidence in the books to support that claim. I *would* buy Teen!Severus' feeling that DD favored MWPP, especially James, over him--not because of Quidditch, but because of lack of recognition for Severus's gifts and because of favoritism (the failure to expel MWPP after so-called Prank, for example). But does that jealous resentment carry over to Harry? And even if it does, is that what the spitting is all about? I don't think so. I think it has to do with the game being over before Snape got a chance to do whatever he was trying to do by refereeing the game, something to do with Quirrell. Carol earlier: > Again, you're assuming. We don't *know* that there's a Lily/Snape > connection. > > Cassy: > Again, true... although if you start with that assumption & 'think > backwards' it helps an awful lot of theories to work! Carol: Yes. That's how we "proved" that Mark Evans must be a Muggleborn relative of Harry's who would be sorted into Gryffindor in HBP. :-) Seriously, we do need to interpret the evidence, but not by fitting it to our pre-existing theories if we can help it. That's how the ultra-feminists "prove" that the HP books are sexist. What we need to *try* to do, and of course it's difficult, is to piece the evidence together into a coherent theory rather than, like Harry with Snape, fitting the pieces into our preconceptions. I have to try, for example, not to take DDM!Snape as a given and to remember that he's only "true" from my perspective and that of other DDM!Snape theorists. But there's much more evidence for DDM!Snape than for a Lily/Snape connection. We can speculate about it and see if the evidence might lead us in that direction, but we can't take it as a given. > Cassy: > So you don't subscribe to the view that it is Lily's *Potions* talent inside that textbook? I find it curious that Slughorn (who taught them all) repeatedly equates Harry with Lily (specifically mentioning her creative brilliance), but compares him favourably to Snape: > > `But I don't think I've ever known such a natural at Potions! > Instinctive, you know ? like his mother! Well, then, it's natural > ability! I don't think even you, Severus ?` `Really?' said Snape > quietly, his eyes still boring into Harry, who felt a certain > disquiet.' (HBP15) > > In other words, Lily demonstrated the sort of imaginative instinct as a Potioneer that even Snape lacked. And I think Hermione could be right about a female mind at work, though wrong about the handwriting, if Snape copied Lily or they collaborated in Potions. Carol: What I see is evidence from SS/PS onward that Snape is a Potions genius, from his initial speech about "softly simmering cauldrons with their shimmering fumes" to the Wolfbane Potion that so few wizards can make. He knows so much about potion-making that he writes the recipes on the board with a flick of his wand and knows instantly which step a student got wrong. Snape is clearly a Potions genius (and, it turns out, a DADA genius) as well. We know that the spells are his. The snarky "just stuff a Bezoar down their throats" sounds like him, too, and fits with his first lesson on Bezoars (which came in handy in HBP by saving Ron's life). I see no reason to doubt that the Potions hints, in the same cramped writing that he used for his DADA OWL. Maybe Lily was also good in Potions, but this is our first indication of her skill. We've had not just evidence but *proof* of Snape's skill since the first book. So to jump from her ability in Potions, which Slughorn remembers along with the cheekiness that made him so fond of her, and which he uses to account for Harry's (seeming) skill in Potions, to a connection between Lily and Severus, much less him copying her Potions hints (which surely a Prefect and Gryffindor like Lily would not do for any Slytherin and MWPP would not tolerate) seems to me to be pushing the evidence beyond what it's capable of supporting. What I see in that passage is the irony that Snape, who knows that Harry is no Potions genius and whose notes Harry is using to "earn" those underserved marks is being discredited ("I don't think *even you,* Severus). Obviously, Severus *was* exceptionally good in Potions, rather like "the legendary Charlie Weasley" in Quidditch ("Charlie Weasley couldn't have done it!"). Only Harry has the advantage of Severus's notes after he's experimented with the Potions, not as he first performed them in class. So Harry is getting credit for having Lily's genes (which, alas, have not passed on whatever Potions talent she may have had to her son) and Severus, who actually did the work, is being overlooked or underestimated yet again. We see exactly the same thing when Harry tells Hermione that he's learned more from the Half-Blood Prince (Snape) than he ever did from Snape! Harry sees the spells and the potions hints as products of the same brilliant mind. So, I think should we, especially given what we already know about Snape's Potions abilities. > > Cassy: > No, [Harry as Horcrux is] only speculation, but I do wonder if part of Snape's problem with Harry ? a very large part ? arises not from his facial resemblance to his mother or father but from the fact that he has Voldemort's scar on his forehead. Snape is mortally afraid of > Voldemort. Carol: Really? Mortally afraid? He spied on Voldemort for Dumbledore "at great personal risk," he strides out the door of the hospital wing to confront him with his prepared story in GoF, looking slightly pale but showing no real fear (the pale face and glittering eyes exactly match Harry's as he's about to enter the third-floor corridor in SS/PS); he uses Occlumency against the greatest Legilimens the WW has ever known; he dares to stay away from the graveyard and remain at Hogwarts when Karkaroff flees in terror. Granted, he won't speak Voldemort's name and doesn't want Harry to do so, either, but that doesn't mean he's "mortally afraid" of him. McGonagall and Arthur Weasley don't speak it, either. (I have a little theory, if I can call it that, that Snape's Dark Mark hurts when he hears Voldemort's name, possibly because it senses that he's traitor to its master, but that's just an idea, not a point I'm arguing here.) At any rate, Snape is no coward. I don't think he's "mortally afraid" of anything. Even Harry is surprised to see that Snape is "angry and--Was it possible?--a little afraid" when Snape confronts Draco at Slughorn's party. Cassy: Indeed ? though Harry never stopped to think it through ? the main reason that Snape was using a Pensieve for the duration of the Occlumency lessons was not to conceal his thoughts from Harry but to protect them from Voldemort. Carol: But we don't know that. I still think that Snape is protecting the memories from an accidental Protego. He clearly doesn't want Harry to see the one memory whose identity we know. But other explanations are possible, as the threads on Snape's use on the Pensieve indicates. Cassy: What if Snape too has seen `a shadow of him stir behind [Harry's] eyes ' (OOtP37)? IMHO, if Harry *is* a Horcrux then Snape might well have seen what Harry is too blind to see... Carol: Even so, seeing such a shadow doesn't indicate that Snape is "mortally afraid" of Voldemort, nor does it necessarily mean that Harry is a Horcrux, or he would have seen the shadow before during the many times that he's looked into Harry's eyes. What's happening in OoP is that Voldemort now has a body and is becoming powerful again, and the mind link is also becoming more powerful. Harry now starts feeling his happiness as well as his anger. He understands *why* Voldie is feeling happy or angry, and he's having visions (moments when he's inside Voldie's mind and seeing and hearing what he sees) as well as dreams. None of that necessarily equates to a Horcrux, and none of it ties in with Snape's being "mortally afraid" of Voldemort. If he were, he'd have run from his as Karkaroff did, or run *to* him as Wormtail did. What he's afraid of, or angry about, in the Occlumency lessons, IMO, is what Voldemort may do to or through Harry via the mind link. He gets most angry when Harry sees memories that aren't his own ("What are that man and that room doing in your mind, Potter?") and especially when Harry starts to see the corridor in the MoM that leads to the Hall of Prophecy--and does nothing to stop the dream memory from continuing. It's Snape who stops it. (And, if I'm not mistaken, he reports his findings to Dumbledore, who says something about "we" in the chapter where he explains the Prophecy, etc., to Harry. I don't have time to look it up now, but the things DD knows about the Occlumency lessons can only have come from Snape.) Cassy: > Oh, I can't wait for July 21! Carol, who can't wait, either From entangledhere at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 21:59:26 2007 From: entangledhere at yahoo.com (Sunny) Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 13:59:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux Message-ID: <20070203215926.25620.qmail@web51406.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164569 Jeremiah, Yes, I agree with you on most points. I'm just saying that it's possible that Harry WAS a Horcrux and that DUMBLEDORE removed it from him, and that's why he has a scar. In the first chapter of PS, Minerva asks Dumbledore, "Is that where?" and he says, "Yes, he'll have that scar forever." BUT if the AK curse doesn't leave a scar, why would she ask that question? Wouldn't she ask, "Why is there a scar?" So perhaps they extracted the piece of soul from Harry before bringing him to the Dursleys', which is what took 24 hours, and which would explain remnants of Voldemort being left in Harry. It's just a theory, like anything else, of course. =) *Sunny* We are the music makers. We are the dreamers of the dreams. http://www.sunnychristian.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com Sat Feb 3 21:03:29 2007 From: cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com (Unspeakable) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 21:03:29 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164570 Hi, Carol (continued!) 1. Cassy: PS/SS: Snape ill-advisedly pursues his own investigation of Quirrell (though we assume Dumbledore had it covered) perhaps hoping to thwart him single-handedly and so regain DD's favour? As it is, Snape fails (despite his best efforts) to prevent Harry a) rushing into danger, b) nearly dying and c) defeating Quirrell and taking the credit. Add to that DD's public demonstration at the Leaving Feast and no one wonder Snape is determined to press for Harry's expulsion at the earliest possible opportunity next term! Carol: The story is told from Harry's very limited point of view, and we have no idea what went on between Snape and Dumbledore. (DD's explanation of Snape's behavior based on the life debt to Harry's father has always struck me as one of DD's half-truth partial explanations--what Harry needs to know or can safely be told. He's certainly not going to tell Harry that Snape is his chief anti-Voldemort agent at Hogwarts.) We know that he suspected Quirrell of trying to steal the stone and tried to thwart him (failing because he didn't know how to get past Fluffy and because the plot required him to be the red herring villain). He was not trying to stop Harry in order to "steal his glory." Nor could he have suspected that Harry was trying to stop *him* from going after the stone. At this point, Snape doesn't seem to know about the Invisibility Cloak, so I don't see how he could have stopped three kids from unwisely entering the corridor. And if he couldn't get past the three-headed dog, he wouldn't expect them to do so, either. I see no glory-seeking here, only an attempt to stop Quirrell. (It would have been better, BTW, if Harry hadn't tried to stop him. Quirrell!mort would have been thwarted by the mirror. But then Harry and his friends wouldn't have had their dangerous adventure and there would be no story.) Cassy: Granted we *don't* know how much collusion there was between Dumbledore & Snape, though (as I said in another post) there is some evidence that Snape was behaving in a slightly maverick fashion in PS/SS (perhaps because 'the plot required him to be the red herring villain') for which I tried to find a psychological explanation. (As Quirrell says: "Severus does seem the type, doesn't he? So useful to have him swooping around like an overgrown bat." PS/SS17) 'It would have been better, BTW, if Harry hadn't tried to stop him. Quirrell!mort would have been thwarted by the mirror.' Quite! And by the same token Snape didn't *need* to get his leg bitten. (Though I admit he saved Harry's life on the Quidditch pitch.) The point I was trying to make is that Snape's (somewhat clumsy) attempts to get involved (combined with his objectionable manner) *inadvertently* caused Harry to put his life in danger (convinced that Snape was about to steal the Stone), which is really the last thing that Snape would have wanted! Not only that, but Harry returned in triumph, beating Slytherin in the House Championship & confirming his position in Dumbledore's affections. Not a good day. NB: Snape didn't know that Harry suspected him of trying to steal the Stone but he *did* do his best to keep Harry away from danger - "Be warned, Potter - any more nighttime wanderings and I will personally make sure you are expelled. Good day to you." (PS/SS16) - and must have been somewhat mortified IMHO to learn that the effect of his words was rather different to what he had intended (though doubtless he managed to blame it all on Harry). 2. Cassy: COS: Snape has his revenge by 'outing' Harry as a Parseltongue and potential Heir of Slytherin. In the end, this leads Harry to risk his life (again) in the Chamber of Secrets and to defeat Riddle (& Lockhart, which is a relief all round). But Snape must be worrying about Harry dying before he can discharge that life-debt... Carol: Why would DDM!Snape seek *revenge* on Harry by outing him as a Parseltongue? If he does so deliberately (and it's one of those ambiguous scenes in which we don't know his motive or even whether he was telling Draco which spell to use), his reaction indicates that he's shrewdly putting two and two together, not necessarily that he plotted to reveal Harry's ability to speak Parseltongue. How could he possibly have anticipated that unless he knew or suspected that Harry's scar contained some of Voldemort's powers? Cassy: Again, sorry, this wasn't meant all that literally ? hence the remark about defeating Lockhart! I do agree that Snape had sound political reasons for testing Harry (hence my question: 'does Snape suspect that Harry's scar is a Horcrux?') but he also seems to enjoy Harry's (very public) discomfort and (in plot terms) it would have to be *Snape* who sets him up with the whole school, even if this wasn't exactly intended! 'Oh Potter, you rotter, oh what have you done? / You're killing off students, you think it's good fun ?' (COS11) As JKR says, he's not a nice person. (And as a secondary motive, I still suspect that Snape grudges Harry his developing relationship with Dumbledore.) However, on a serious note, I wonder if Snape really believes Harry to be *dangerous* to himself or others at this stage? (If Harry *does* have a hidden connection to Voldemort one might expect a former DE to be the person who works it out!) Carol: Certainly, Snape isn't plotting to get Parseltongue Harry into the Chamber of Secrets. ... Harry and Ron overhear Snape showing up Lockhart's incompetence and telling him that this is his chance to deal with the monster, and they get the idea to go to the DADA teacher to help them enter the CoS. Granted, if it hadn't been for Snape, they wouldn't have gone to Lockhart or tried to enter the chamber, but he didn't know they were listening in, and he certainly wasn't enticing them to try to save Ginny themselves. The life debt to James has nothing to do with it. (And that's the one scene where we see concrete evidence of Snape's concern for the students' safety: his hand gripping a chair when he hears that a student has been taken into the chamber.) Cassy: Absolutely! I didn't mean to imply that this was deliberate on Snape's part ? just that one consequence of Harry learning he can speak Parseltongue is that it enables him to get into the Chamber. I was merely trying to point out the irony that once again Snape (indirectly) contributes to Harry risking his life... which isn't something that Snape wants to do at all, IMHO. That's where the life-debt to James comes into it! Snape *deplores* Harry's recklessness. (His concern about Harry's physical welfare may be one reason why he appears to favour expulsion at times, though I hear what you're saying about it not being a very convincing threat.) Like you, I was really touched by that line in COS16 - Hooch is about to faint, Flitwick bursts into tears: 'Snape gripped the back of a chair very hard and said, "How can you be sure?"' Speaks volumes, IMHO. 3. Cassy: POA: Well, the result of Snape *totally* losing it in the Shrieking Shack (Lily-died-despite-my-warning -because-James-trusted-you-Sirius!) is that the real culprit, Wormtail, escaped... to rejoin Voldemort. Sirius Black is (still) the Most Wanted, Remus Lupin is a disgraced werewolf and Fudge thinks that Dumbledore employs deranged staff. Nice one, Severus... still it's good to know you're (supposed to be) on our side! Carol: The result of Snape's entering the Shrieking Shack is that he hears only part of the story (the illegal Animagi) but causes HRH to listen to the rest. (They knock him out because they're not sure who's right and he's preventing them from hearing the rest of Lupin's and Black's story.) If he hadn't entered, suspecting the werewolf of aiding the convicted murderer (and realizing that Harry was also there when he found the Invisibility Cloak), Harry would not have insisted on hearing what Lupin had to say and ended up believing in Black's innocence instead of wanting to kill him. (Harry still has his doubts, and Ron is still defending Scabbers against the seemingly ridiculous charge of being a murdering traitor. Snape, unfortunately, doesn't hear the rest of the story because he's knocked out, and continues to distrust Black even after he finds out that Pettigrew really is alive and the Animagus story is true.) It's *Harry* who saves Wormtail's life (Snape doesn't even know he's there in rat form) and it's Lupin's transformation into a werewolf because he didn't drink the potion that Snape brought him, minutes too late, that enabled Wormtail to escape. Snape later conjures stretchers to rescue HRH and even the supposed murderer Black from the werewolf and any Dementors that decide to return. It *is* good that Snape is on our side or HRH would be dead or worse. As for Lupin being exposed as a werewolf, he did that himself by failing to take his potion and rushing out onto the grounds on a full moon night when he knew three students were out there. What was Snape supposed to tell Fudge? That he'd conjured stretchers to save the murderer from the Dementors? He had to mention the murderer's werewolf accomplice, and the potion he failed to take, for the story to make any sense. Since Snape isn't reprimanded for his words and actions, I'm guessing that he did so with Dumbledore's stated or tacit approval. And, of course, Lupin resigned on his own, having endangered the students all year by concealing information about Black that could have prevented him from entering the school and eliminated the necessity for Dementors guarding the school, not to mention exposed three students to the danger of werewolf bites. True, Snape was not averse to receiving an award for heroism, much less to seeing Sirius Black have his soul sucked (a fate that Harry also thinks Black deserves, as he tells Lupin earlier in the book, PoA Am. ed. 247), but as he twice tells Harry, he's saving Harry's life--or, at least, he thinks he's doing so by tying up a werewolf who's about to transform and holding a convicted murderer at wandpoint. And he does conjure the stretchers later and take four unconscious people to the hospital despite the danger still posed by the werewolf. At any rate, to say that Snape caused Wormtail to escape is to ignore the evidence completely, and it's also unrealistic to think that Lupin's own actions would not have caused both the loss of his job and his exposure as a werewolf (Fudge was at Hogwarts, after all, and saw Snape bringing in the injured Black, whose wounds would need to be explained) with or without Snape's later revelation to his students. If Lupin had not resigned, he would surely have been fired for carelessly placing students in danger (and concealing important information from the headmaster throughout the book). Cassy: Good points ? as you rightly point out, I was too hasty here (without the book to hand) & exaggerated Snape's role in Wormtail's escape. (In any case, the intent was not to *blame* Snape for something which involved a lot of others; as much as to try to understand what his regrets might be at the end of the book.) I *don't* believe that Snape helps matters much in the Shack... HRH respected Lupin (in spite of everything) & were beginning to listen before Snape appeared. You could argue (admittedly in a rather perverse sense) that Snape actually slowed things down (and time was of the essence that night!). I suppose I was left with an overriding sense that the whole encounter was a farce and that Snape, in *trying* to do the right thing, came to all the wrong conclusions ? however, unfortunately or understandably ? which contributed to the tragedy. (After all, TT!Harry is sorely tempted to grab the cloak and prevent Snape from entering the Shack.) However, I'm not interested in being perverse, still less in ignoring the evidence, so I retract that Snape *caused* Wormtail's escape in any way. More importantly, though, I still believe that Snape could have *prevented* it, if only he been prepared to listen to Lupin & Black. Yes, it's 'Lupin's transformation into a werewolf ... that enabled Wormtail to escape', but *crucially* with Sirius preoccupied in defending the trio (the role that is given to Movie-Snape)! If Snape had been on his feet then *he'd* have been able to prevent Wormtail's escape while Sirius dealt with Lupin. As it was the trio really had no option but to attack irrational!Snape in the Shack, who was consequently hanging in the air unconscious while Voldemort's servant escaped to rejoin his master. Your account is a little harsh on Lupin, IMHO. Yes, he should have taken his Potion but his contribution to the tragedy was ultimately no worse than Snape's. Severus (with the very best of intentions) a) refused to listen to Lupin's explanation despite HRH pleading with him to do so, b) as a result had to be immobilized by the trio so wasn't able to help in the crisis of Lupin's transformation & Wormtail's escape, c) did his level best to see Sirius reduced to a fate worse than death, d) caused a scene in the hospital wing which could have exposed Dumbledore's involvement in illegal Time-turning and e) outed ex-Order Member, Remus Lupin, as a werewolf. (Did Snape mention Lupin to Fudge? I don't remember. But I doubt that DD approved of him telling the Slytherins that Lupin was a werewolf, much less of his behaviour in the hospital wing, which alarmed the Minister and might have done worse had not DD managed to shut him up!) I'd like to have been there when DD debriefed his double agent afterwards ? there'd have been groans all round, I reckon. I'm not really saying this in *blame* of Snape who acted bravely & sincerely according to his view of circumstances, even if he did become insane with anger in the Shack ... (I still think we need to know why & I agree with you that it's interesting how Snape's initial reaction to Black parallels Harry's ? more evidence for Snape/Lily IMHO!) But I doubt DDM!Snape would have been left feeling very good about it afterwards; especially now he's stuck with Wormtail at Spinner's End... 4. GOF: This is the one I find *really* tragic. Moody-Crouch made one crucial mistake that should have been enough to unmask him as a Death Eater. Namely, his (completely false) claim that Dumbledore had authorized him to search Snape's Office, which betrayed a fundamental misunderstanding of Dumbledore's character. Snape was appalled and furious ? 'Dumbledore happens to trust me' (GOF25) ? brave words: but did he really believe it? Evidently not. When Crouch cleverly alluded to the Dark Mark - 'spots that don't come off' etc. - Snape was crushed. After that, he didn't dare put Dumbledore's trust to the test, for fear of being more bitterly hurt, IMHO. Thus when Crouch was given the Veritaserum - & confessed that '[Snape] found me in his office, I said I was under orders to search it' - this was almost certainly the first that Dumbledore had heard of the matter! Poor Snape. Now he *knows* it's all his fault (Cedric's murder and Voldemort's return). Carol: It's no more Snape's fault that Wormtail killed Cedric and resurrected Voldemort than it is Harry's or Dumbledore's. None of them knew that Fake!Moody was an impostor, much less that he was a supposedly dead Death Eater. And Cedric wasn't even supposed to be in the graveyard. Should we blame Harry for telling him to grab the cup together? That makes more sense than blaming Snape. Not even Harry, who blames Snape for everything he can think of, has blamed him for Cedric's death or the restoration of Voldemort, all of which are quite properly attributed to the people responsible primarily Voldemort. Cassy: But my point here is that Fake!Moody could have been unmasked much earlier IMHO had not Snape's own insecurity prevented him from revealing to Dumbledore that Moody had searched his Office (apparently on Dumbledore's orders!) Of course I could be wrong, but I refuse to believe that the real Moody would have lied about this, as I think Dumbledore would have known. (Barty Crouch boasts of this lie under Veritaserum, implying that it successfully dealt with Snape.) It's a subtle point, but the first time I ever read GOF I felt for Snape at this moment, believing that he would blame himself. (Of course, *moral* responsibility belongs with Voldemort ? I'm talking about cause & effect!) BTW, I agree with you that there probably isn't any mystery to Snape's absence from Harry's POV of the crowd. I asked the question because I've heard it raised again & again ? mostly from people who think that Snape was in the maze as a spider Animagus! 5. Cassy: OOtP: Now Snape's finally in a position to risk his neck spying for the Order... but his penchant for emotional mistakes continues. I'm not just referring to the Occlumency 'fiasco' ? but to the stupid taunting of Sirius Black, (which probably *did* make some contribution to the tragedy ? Harry knew his godfather pretty well, IMHO). This means that Snape's most significant role ? as the one who tried to persuade Sirius *not* to go to the Ministry on the fatal day ? is completely overlooked by Harry Potter. Carol: Harry is primarily responsible for the Occlumency fiasco, having refused to practice because he wants to have the dream, not to mention that *he* entered the Pensieve, a point that Dumbledore tactfully neglects to mention when he blames *himself* for the fiasco. As for taunting Sirius Black, both men were behaving immaturely, pushing each other's buttons, with Black calling Snape "Snivellus" and "Malfoy's lap dog" and Snape pointing out that Black was seen by Lucius Malfoy on Platform 9 3/4 (useful information that Black needs to know, however sarcastically delivered) and implying that Black is a coward. As Dumbledore tells Harry later, Black is a grown man and is not going to be prompted into rash action simply because Snape provoked him. His motivation, aside from wanting to escape from the stifling and depressing atmosphere of 12 GP and *do* something, was to help rescue Harry. Black was enjoying himself in his fight with Cousin Bellatrix, to the point of not paying attention to where he was standing. Harry at first blames Bellatrix and tries to get revenge on her, but later he shifts the blame to Snape despite Dumbledore's pointing out that Snape told Black to stay behind and wait for DD. Dumbledore also points out that Snape is responsible for sending the Order to save Harry and company, but Harry doesn't want to hear it. Nor can Dumbledore safely mention what's really on Harry's mind--Black went to the MoM to save him because he, Harry, had believed the vision that Voldemort implanted in his mind. Snape provides a convenient scapegoat but he's less responsible than Black himself, and much less so than the real killer, Bellatrix, and the Dark wizard who sent her to the MoM, Voldemort. (Kreacher, who tricked his master into being away from the fireplace when Harry showed up to check on him, is also partly to blame.) Cassy: Again, my intention here was to try to explore DDM!Snape's possible reaction to the events of OotP (& his share in them) rather than to blame him for everything. I agree that the Occlumency fiasco was mostly Harry's fault ? still he *was* only fifteen at the time ? whereas Snape's supposed to be a responsible adult! IMHO he should not have canceled the lessons however sorely provoked. Even Lupin (not easily moved) was justly angry about Snape's failure to abide by DD's instructions here: "If anyone's going to tell Snape it will be me!' he said firmly. "But Harry, first of all, you're to go back to Snape and tell him that on no account is he to stop giving you lessons - when Dumbledore hears -" (OOtP29) As for the situation with Sirius, I mostly just feel sad that Snape's true role went unacknowledged. Harry needed to see that Snape didn't want Sirius dead ? however much he hated him. And what must Snape feel now? Aggrieved that Sirius didn't listen to him (though given their past relations that was hardly unsurprising); still more aggrieved that Harry blames him unfairly for Sirius's actions; indifferent about the actual death; but ultimately sick that five students & six Order members ran into danger because of a vision that Harry shouldn't have had ... which is (at least partly) Snape's fault. Even before HBP, that's a heavy load to carry... Beneath a veneer of indifference, I suspect that Snape's regrets have been accumulating steadily since Harry Potter started at Hogwarts ... & all ultimately stemming from his failure to make peace witrh the past. I just hope that Harry is able to understand & forgive Snape in DH ... even offering him absolution at the end. Phew, there's a lot to think about...! Cassy, who hopes this has clarified her position(s) a little. :-) P.S. Cassy: So all this together might help to explain why Snape isn't very good at the Patronus Charm... or at least disagreed with Harry 'on the best way to tackle dementors' Carol: Snape can certainly cast a perfectly good Patronus or he wouldn't be able to communicate with other members of the Order, notably Dumbledore before the battle of the MoM. Snape may well know a more effective method of fighting Dementors that's suitable to a class full of sixth years, most of whom have only cast a Patronus in the RoR without even a Dementor!Boggart to practice against (or not at all if they weren't in the DA). We aren't told what the alternate method is, only that Harry, who knows that casting a Patronus works for *him*, disagrees with Snape. But Snape is both a DADA and a Dark Arts expert, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he knew an alternate method that's easier to use than an advanced spell that many adult wizards can't master and that requires a wizard to concentrate on a happy memory in the face of a monstrous being that's trying to suck out all the wizard's happiness. I'll wager that Hermione remembers Snape's alternate method and uses it in DH when she finds herself unable to cast a Patronus. Cassy: (I like your idea re. Hermione!) Yes, Snape must be able to produce a corporeal Patronus. However, could it still be argued that it is easier to do this when there are no Dementors about, as Harry discovers when his Patronus charges Malfoy down at that Quidditch match in POA? As I recall, Harry is still having trouble repelling the Boggart-Dementors at this point ... only managing to shoot silvery stuff out of his wand. I am just interested as to why JKR let slip that Snape disagrees with Harry and Lupin's method of tackling Dementors (though your explanation makes sense). Might this be a character clue as well as a plot point? Maybe Snape feels that in such circumstances he wouldn't be able to summon the required force necessary to drive them away ... Snape's stock of *really* happy memories must be even smaller than Harry's. (Harry, after all, found good friends at Hogwarts, where Snape seems to have been quite miserable.) From kking0731 at gmail.com Sun Feb 4 00:05:05 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 00:05:05 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hollows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164571 ereshkigal_doom: Sorry to be a smart-arse, but the book is entitled "The Deathly Hallows". Does this invalidate your theory or am I just not following your argument somehow? A 'hallow' is a holy thing as in the line from the Lord's Prayer: "Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name ...." or "Halloween" (according to Wikipedia, this is the short form of All-hallow-even which means the eve before All Hallow's Day, more modernly known as All Saints Day which means the same thing.) So a hallowed thing is a thing that is holy. Snow: Thanks for pointing out my neglect in proofing my Hallow from my Hollow. Let me see if I can fix the proposal area so that it may make some sense to what I was saying. My proposal therefore is: that the Deathly Hallows are good persons who gave their lives to evil for the greater good; sacred (hallow) death; empty of life (deathly) but with ability beyond the boundaries of death because of the way in which their life was taken...who will be a powerful force that will protect Harry. How's that? From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Feb 4 00:09:21 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 00:09:21 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164572 zgirnius: > And illustrates my point. All who knew there was a Secret, were told Black was its Keeper. I presume the only people who knew the whole truth were the Potters, Sirius, and Peter (until he told Voldemort). I do think they must have been planning to use notes, or something of the sort, for Peter to communicate the secret to friends the Potters wished to enable to visit them. Because they did plan to keep Peter's role a secret, which means either they would never allow anyone to know the secret, or they envisioned a means of communicating IT without revealing Peter's involvement. Ceridwen: I'm so lazy tonight! I could look it up, but I'd just rather not. Didn't Sirius also say that he planned to go into hiding so people would believe he was the SK? A decoy move to keep suspicion off of Pettigrew. If he did go into hiding, or if he had planned on doing so as soon as it was out that there was an SK for the Potters, then of course they would use notes to reveal the secret to whoever they wanted to come visit. Sirius is in hiding to protect the secret, he left a few notes to give to a few close friends at the Potters' discretion. Supports the InHidingSK!Sirius fiction, and allows Peter to divulge the information without being revealed as the true SK. Ceridwen, who is really lazy tonight. From loves_the_lit at yahoo.com Sat Feb 3 22:51:17 2007 From: loves_the_lit at yahoo.com (loves_the_lit) Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 22:51:17 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hollows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164573 > ereshkigal_doom: > Sorry to be a smart-arse, but the book is entitled "The Deathly > Hallows". Does this invalidate your theory or am I just not > following your argument somehow? > > A 'hallow' is a holy thing as in the line from the Lord's Prayer: > > "Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name ...." > > or "Halloween" (according to Wikipedia, this is the short form of > All-hallow-even which means the eve before All Hallow's Day, more > modernly known as All Saints Day which means the same thing.) > > So a hallowed thing is a thing that is holy. > > I too have been wondering what or whom could the Halllows refer to. The dictionary defines hallows not just as a saint, as in All Saint's Day, but as a spirit. JKR doesn't seem to put things in her books lightly. What seems to be a mere stray comment or some comic relief (like Harry living with the Dursley's every summer, we find to be very important in a later book. Could the Hallows be the ghosts of Hogwarts? We know the school is protected by a great deal of magic. Could they be a part of it? I have to confess, the idea didn't take full shape until I read that before Book #6 was published, Bloomsbury took out a number of copyrights on book titles, one of which was "Harry Pooter and the Hallows of Hogwarts." loves_the_lit From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 01:35:49 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 01:35:49 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164574 Cassy wrote: > > Your account is a little harsh on Lupin, IMHO. Yes, he should have taken his Potion but his contribution to the tragedy was ultimately no worse than Snape's. Severus (with the very best of intentions) a) refused to listen to Lupin's explanation despite HRH pleading with him to do so, b) as a result had to be immobilized by the trio so wasn't able to help in the crisis of Lupin's transformation & Wormtail's escape, c) did his level best to see Sirius reduced to a fate worse than death, d) caused a scene in the hospital wing which could have exposed Dumbledore's involvement in illegal Time-turning and e) outed ex-Order Member, Remus Lupin, as a werewolf. > > (Did Snape mention Lupin to Fudge? I don't remember. But I doubt that DD approved of him telling the Slytherins that Lupin was a werewolf, much less of his behaviour in the hospital wing, which alarmed the Minister and might have done worse had not DD managed to shut him up!) Carol responds: I've already explained why I think that Snape behaved as he did in the Shrieking Shack, so I won't go into that. As to Lupin, I'm of two minds. One is EverSoWeak, EverSoSneaky!Lupin. He *does* tell a lot of half-truths and a few outright lies in PoA and elsewhere, and he concealed the Marauder's Map from Dumbledore even after his resignation. (Mike, I think, mentioned his exaggerated statement in PoA about the Order members being outnumbered twenty to one in VW 1.) Okay, so he's understandably secretive, lying even to himself in PoA because he has so much to conceal, but why an exaggeration like the one Mike quotes? And I disbelieve everything he says about Snape's motivations (the Order of Merlin, jealousy of James's Quidditch skills), though he rightly credits Snape's potion-making abilities and skills as a "superb Occlumens." Is he reversing the order of things, implying that he resigned after Snape's comment to the Slytherins at breakfast when he really did so earlier, first thing that morning according to Hagrid? And surely, decency would have compelled him to resign, anyway. My alternate view is DADACurseVictim!Lupin, who loses his job not because of Snape, who has held his tongue about the so-called Prank for about twenty years, but because of the DADA curse, which causes him to conceal things from Dumbledore that he shouldn't conceal (the map, the fact that Black is an Animagus and can get past the Dementors that way, the fact that he knows secret passageways into the school and could be hiding in the Shrieking Shack). If he had turned in the map to DD as he ought to have done, he wouldn't have been looking for HRH on it and spotted Peter Pettigrew instead. (Talk about coincidence? Or was it?) If he'd only stopped to think, he'd have realized that Snape must be coming with the potion. He'd have hidden the map and drunk the potion and then gone out to the Shrieking Shack. Instead, he enabled Snape to follow him and, much worse, transformed into a werewolf in the presence of three third-year students, endangering them and allowing Pettigrew to get away and rejoin Voldemort. (BTW, it's a good thing Snape *did* follow him or HRH and Black, all of them unconscious, would have been left on the ground with a werewolf at large and the Dementors perfectly capable of returning.) To answer your question on Fudge and Snape, Fudge does know that Lupin is a werewolf, so either Snape or Dumbledore must have told him. Harry tells Lupin that yes, he is resigning, and Harry asks, "Why? The Ministry of Magic don't think you were helping Sirius, do they?" and Lupin answers, "No. Professor Dumbledore managed to convince Fudge that I was trying to save your lives" (PoA Am. ed. 423). Lupin calls that story (which credits Lupin with Snape's own motive and certainly *would* incense Snape) "the final straw for Severus" and implies that the loss of the Order of Merlin is the reason that Snape "lets slip" at breakfast that Lupin is a werewolf. When Harry says, "You're not resigning because of that!" Lupin doesn't answer directly. He just says, "At this time tomorrow, the owls will start arriving from parents" who don't want a werewolf to teach their children, and that h="after last night, I see their point. I could have bitten any of you" (423). So he doesn't say that he resigns because of Snape (though he allows Harry to think that the owls from parents would arrive because of Snape). But he actually says that it's the right thing to do (which it is). But the point is, Fudge did know that Lupin was a werewolf before Lupin resigned. Lupin could not have been present for the conversation between DD, Snape, and Fudge, so he only *thinks* (as he says himself) that the loss of the Order of Merlin was a blow to Snape. At any rate, it's inconceivable, IMO, that DD would not have assured both Snape and Fudge that he would ask for Lupin's resignation and released Snape from his promise of secrecy regarding Lupin's condition. On another note, HRH were in the hospital wing and didn't know that Lupin had resigned, but if he did in fact resign first thing in the morning, he wouldn't have appeared at the staff table. If the Slytherins wondered aloud whether he was ill again, Snape could have responded with perfect propriety that he had resigned. Then, when he was pressed for a reason, he could have "let slip" that Lupin was a werewolf. But Snape's revelation is *not* the reason that Lupin resigned, whether it occurred before or after the resignation. He resigned because he endangered his own students. And Fudge would not have allowed Lupin to stay on in any case. > Cassy: > Again, my intention here was to try to explore DDM!Snape's possible reaction to the events of OotP (& his share in them) rather than to blame him for everything. I agree that the Occlumency fiasco was mostly Harry's fault ? still he *was* only fifteen at the time ? whereas Snape's supposed to be a responsible adult! IMHO he should not have canceled the lessons however sorely provoked. Even Lupin (not easily moved) was justly angry about Snape's failure to abide by DD's instructions here: "If anyone's going to tell Snape it will be me!' he said firmly. "But Harry, first of all, you're to go back to Snape and tell him that on no account is he to stop giving you lessons - when Dumbledore hears -" (OOtP29) > Carol: But Harry certainly doesn't abide by Lupin's orders. He doesn't want to confront Snape *or* resume the lessons. The question is whether Lupin went to Snape as he said he would do. If so, Snape must have given him a convincing reason for not resuming them as we don't hear any more about it. And Dumbledore also knows that they've been stopped; he knows all about the Pensieve visit and understands Snape's anger about it. *He* doesn't order the Occlumency lessons resumed. Why not? Because Harry enraged Snape by invading his privacy and adding salt to old wounds? He could have ordered Snape to get over it and resume the lessons. Either he thinks that resuming them is futile (he does call them a fiasco) or he thinks that they're doing more harm than good. Cassy: > As for the situation with Sirius, I mostly just feel sad that Snape's true role went unacknowledged. Harry needed to see that Snape didn't want Sirius dead ? however much he hated him. And what must Snape feel now? Aggrieved that Sirius didn't listen to him (though given their past relations that was hardly unsurprising); still more aggrieved that Harry blames him unfairly for Sirius's actions; indifferent about the actual death; but ultimately sick that five students & six Order members ran into danger because of a vision that Harry shouldn't have had ... which is (at least partly) Snape's fault. Even before HBP, that's a heavy load to carry... > > Beneath a veneer of indifference, I suspect that Snape's regrets have been accumulating steadily since Harry Potter started at Hogwarts Carol: I'm a firm believer in DDM!Snape, but I don't see him regretting his actions at all. He's saved Harry's life at least three times (SS/PS, the stretcher incident in PoA, the MoM), saved him from expulsion for the Sectumsempra incident by saving Draco's life, and saved him from a Crucio. IMO, his only regrets are joining the DEs in the first place, revealing the Prophecy to Voldemort, failing to prevent the Potters' deaths, and now, having to murder his mentor and only real friend, Dumbledore. There's no room for weak regrets and wearing his heart on his sleeve, and, let's face it, he hated Sirius Black. No, he didn't want him dead once he realized that they were really on the same side, but he's not going to blame himself for what happened. After all, he told Black to stay home and wait for DD, and if Black didn't listen, that's not Snape's fault. I doubt that he blames himself for any of the things you've listed. I'm quite sure he thinks he's doing the right thing. > > Cassy: > (I like your idea re. Hermione!) Yes, Snape must be able to produce a corporeal Patronus. I am just interested as to why JKR let slip that Snape disagrees with Harry and Lupin's method of tackling Dementors (though your explanation makes sense). Carol: Funny. I saw it from the opposite perspective, Harry disagreeing with Snape. Lupin says himself in PoA, "I don't pretend to be an expert at fighting dementors, Harry. Quite the contrary" (189). Assuming that he's telling the truth, maybe Snape knows more about the matter than he does. (I'm not even sure that Lupin produced a corporeal Patronus against the Dementor on the train. Maybe all he produced was silvery stuff like Harry when he first faces the Dementors on the lake.) Cassy: Might this be a character clue as well as a plot point? Maybe Snape feels that in such circumstances he wouldn't be able to summon the required force necessary to drive them away ... Snape's stock of *really* happy memories must be even smaller than Harry's. Carol: The same could be said of Lupin. I don't think that Snape disagrees with them. He just knows more about the matter than they do. In fact, he's with Fudge when Fudge brings the Dementor into Hogwarts and suffers no harm from it, so he clearly knows something that Harry doesn't know. Occlumency, maybe? But Snape isn't necessarily talking about how *he* repels a Dementor. He's telling his sixth years how *they* should do it. And Harry, for whom a Patronus works just fine, disagrees with him, not realizing that the others may not be able to do what he can do (after practicing with a Boggart!Dementor and seeing his future self cast a powerful Patronus). Carol, who thinks that Snape is made of sterner stuff than you evidently do (but believes that he's currently suffering mental anguish over the death of Dumbledore) From kking0731 at gmail.com Sun Feb 4 02:32:05 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 02:32:05 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hollows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164575 loves_the_lit: I too have been wondering what or whom could the Halllows refer to. The dictionary defines hallows not just as a saint, as in All Saint's Day, but as a spirit. JKR doesn't seem to put things in her books lightly. What seems to be a mere stray comment or some comic relief (like Harry living with the Dursley's every summer, we find to be very important in a later book. Could the Hallows be the ghosts of Hogwarts? We know the school is protected by a great deal of magic. Could they be a part of it? I have to confess, the idea didn't take full shape until I read that before Book #6 was published, Bloomsbury took out a number of copyrights on book titles, one of which was "Harry Pooter and the Hallows of Hogwarts." Snow: You came to a similar conclusion as my husband, who upon hearing the name of the next book decided that Dumbledore died to join the Founders who were the sacred order and protectors of Hogwarts. Something I haven't given up on as an idea, but didn't connect as well as the ghosts from the wand, since we know very little of the Founders. We do know about the echoes from the wand in the graveyard that performed tasks of protection when they were said to be nothing more than a ghostly echo. I think it has always bothered me that Dumbledore seemed so determined that what Harry described, coming from the wand connection, were nothing more than a ghostly echo. I really like the ghostly echoes as the deathly hallows, although that would not mean that the Founders were not part of the elite group of the Deathly Hallows. Snow From fairwynn at hotmail.com Sun Feb 4 02:37:09 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 02:37:09 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164576 > Carol, who thinks that Snape is made of sterner stuff than you > evidently do (but believes that he's currently suffering mental > anguish over the death of Dumbledore) > I find I mostly agree with your views on Snape. I did not agree with your earlier post where you said that you didn't think he was mortally afraid of Voldemort. He may not be "mortally" afraid (wonder what that really means?), but he's intelligent, therefore he *has* to be afraid of Voldemort. And since he's engaged in a seriously risky endeavor, in which he can easily get tortured and killed at Voldemort's hand or his command, it would make sense that he fear Voldemort with a mortal fear. Also, fear does not negate bravery. In fact, Snape is *more* brave, if while fearing Voldemort, he goes to him anyway as a spy. Brave people are not unafraid; they just go ahead with what they must do in spite of their fear. Snape would be a fool to not fear Voldemort. Okay, on another note: I read a lot of Cassy's website and notice that she believes Snape will die and Harry will forgive Snape as he dies. I disagree with this because I believe that JKR has set Harry up to do 3 things in regards to Snape. 1. JKR has made a big point of Harry's hatred of Snape growing more and more personal. Therefore, Harry must overcome his hatred of Snape. And JKR won't let him destroy Voldemort with his power the dark lord knows not of -- love -- until he overcomes that hatred. 2. JKR has had Harry think that he will "never" forgive Snape. Therefore Harry will forgive Snape. 3. JKR has had Harry time and again reject Dumbledore's trust in Snape. Therefore Harry, as DDM!Harry, will come to trust DDM!Snape. Harry can forgive Snape in a dying!Snape scene. But it takes time to build trust. So I think that Harry will have some time over the course of DH to overcome his hatred, forgive Snape, *and* learn to trust him. So no forgiveness while Snape is dying -- it's too quick. But that doesn't mean Snape will live. I am very curious as to what those of you who agree with DDM!Snape think. Will Snape live or die and why? wynnleaf From catlady at wicca.net Sun Feb 4 02:54:26 2007 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 02:54:26 -0000 Subject: Protego/McGonagall/Ships/Tobias/HarryRelatives/Kreachur/MaterialThings/DH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164577 Dana wrote in : << Of course I am speculating but Snape's surprise about the shield charm (does anyone know if Harry even knows this shield charm before this time?) >> Yes. He learned it from Hermione in GoF chapter 31: "Tired of walking in on them all over the school, Professor McGonagall had given Harry permission to use the empty Transfiguration classroom at lunchtimes. He had soon mastered the Impediment Jinx, a spell to slow down and obstruct attackers, the Reductor curse, which would enable him to blast solid objects out of his way, and the Four-Point Spell, a useful discovery of Hermione's which would make his wand point due north, therefore enabling him to check whether he was going in the right direction within the maze. He was still having trouble with the [***] Shield Charm [***], though. This was supposed to cast a temporary, invisible wall around himself that deflected minor curses; Hermione managed to shatter it with a well placed Jelly-Legs Jinx. Harry wobbled around the room for ten minutes afterwards before she had looked up the counter-jinx." Then he taught it to Hermione in OoP chapter 25: "...redoubling his efforts for the DA. Harry was pleased to see that all of them, even Zacharias Smith, had been spurred on to work harder than ever by the news that ten more Death Eaters were now on the loose, but in nobody was this improvement more pronounced than in Neville. (snip) when Harry taught them the [***] Shield Charm [***] ? a means of deflecting minor jinxes so that they rebounded upon the attacker ? only Hermione mastered the charm faster than Neville." Carol wrote in : << and [McGonagall] develops an equal fondness for Harry, revealed by her buying him an expensive racing broom and allowing him on the Quidditch team in his first year when other first-years aren't even allowed their own broom >> I agree that McGonagall is very fond of Harry, but I don't think the Quidditch stuff is evidence of her fondness for him. It can all be so well explained by her fondness for Gryffindor winning Quidditch matches. In addition, IIRC it is not canon that McGonagall bought him the Nimbus 2000. It may have been paid for out of his Gringotts vault. Ron's broomstick in OoP at least disproves the theory that Hogwarts buys one new (good) broomstick for each player accepted to a House Quidditch team; only replacements must be paid for by the player, parents, Lucius Malfoy, or Sirius Black. Blitz wrote in : << My question is what did Minerva do before getting the teaching position? >> She may have been involved in the defeat of Grindelwald, but she must have learned more Transfiguration than she learned at Hogwarts. Because finishing seventh year with top marks doesn't strike me as adequate preparation for teaching seventh year and nurturing any exceptionally advanced students. I don't know if there's a Transfiguration Guild which takes apprentices. Claudia wrote in : << Why were DD, McGonagall, and LV still single after all these yrs? Well LV was obvious, how can someone so evil ever know love. But for DD and McGonagall, maybe there was a spark there that no one ever noticed. Is it possible? >> The Dumbledore/McGonagall ship used to be very popular, but I've *always* preferred the Dumbledore/Pomfrey and McGonagall/Hooch ships. Dumbledore is 150 years old. That gives him enough time to have outlived several wives. I like to think his first wife was a Muggle who died of natural old age. And that his last wife was a powerful and skilled witch, perhaps a fellow professor at Hogwarts's (perhaps the DADA professor before Professor Merrythought), who was killed by Grindelwald before DD defeated Grindelwald. (Btw, the implausibility of the name Merrythought annoys me. She could have chosen Merriweather or Merryman, which are real names.) I imagine that Poppy is a widow; someone suggested that her husband was named Herb Pomfrey and I embraced the suggestion. Herb may also have been killed in the struggle against Grindelwald. Of course, if the hypothetical DD/PP ship ("I haven't been so embarrassed since Madam Pomfrey said she liked my new earmuffs") is fairly new, Herb might have been killed in the struggle against Voldemort instead. As for Minerva, if she doesn't have a partner, she may be in a 'her heart's in the grave' situation. Any high school sweetheart of hers could have been killed in the struggle against Grindelwald. A theory also has been floated on this list that handsome, charming Tom Riddle seduced her into marriage because he thought her talents and her hypothetical wizarding family connections would be useful to him, and she turned against him when she found out his real nature, and is trying to keep the former marriage secret -- it can't be good for anyone's career to be known as He Who Must Not Be Named's wife. Carol wrote in : << (It strikes me as odd that the announcement would identify Tobias as a Muggle, but, oh, well.) >> I imagine that the announcement doesn't SAY that Tobias is a Muggle, but IDENTIFIES him as one by saying what school he attended (not Hogwarts), what he does for a living. and that kind of thing. Danno wrote in : << What if... Voldemort turns out to be a relative of Harrys? Not the "Luke I am your father" type of thing, but what about Grandfather? >> JKR denied it on her website: <> Along with : <> Magpie wrote in : << He defends him by saying that Hermione was "quite right" to say Kreacher should have been treated with respect, and how he warned Sirius and how Sirius treated him badly and, well, look what happened. >> The damage done by Sirius's attitude toward Kreachur was not that Sirius kicked him or called him a filthy toe-rag, but that Sirius didn't investigate Kreachur's prolonged absence even tho' Harry warned him: "They can leave the house if they really want to," Harry contradicted him. "Dobby did, he left the Malfoys' to give me warnings two years ago. He had to punish himself afterwards, but he still managed it." Steve bboyminn wrote in : << H[arry] doesn't value material things because he has seen the material things don't bring happiness. >> Harry *does* value (some) material things: the Nimbus 2000 and the Firebolt spring to mind. Didn't he *cry* over the Nimbus being destroyed? Snow wrote in : << my husband ... upon hearing the name of the next book decided that Dumbledore died to join the Founders who were the sacred order and protectors of Hogwarts. >> First thought: Salazar isn't there, as the other Three threw him out. Second thought: bringing the spirit of Salazar together with the other Founders so he can help protect the school is highly congruent with repairing the rift between Slytherin and the other Houses as recommended by the Sorting Hat. Third thought: I really like this idea! From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 03:04:34 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 03:04:34 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Will Snape live or die and why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164578 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wynnleaf" wrote: > I am very curious as to what those of you who agree with DDM!Snape > think. Will Snape live or die and why? > I am most definitely a Snape supporter, and I am of the mind that Snape will die, simply because it would be far more dramatic that way. The situation surrounding his death will cause Harry to forgive him (Snape will save someone, or his death will prove somehow he was loyal to DD). No doubt Harry will be assailed by all sorts of other evidence of Snape's loyalty (DD's portrait perhaps--who knows?), but it will take Snape's death to convince him. Harry won't kill him. Despite his incarceration, I find a showdown with Lucius most appealing, but Lucius is no match for Snape. Voldemort will do it. Of course, I personally like to think of Snape surviving, and he and Harry developing a friendship. But that's just wishful thinking on my part. I can always read fanfiction for that. In canon, Snape hates Harry and his old wounds are too deep. He won't change and I don't think I would believe it if he did. One of the reasons I admire Snape so is that he is capable of doing the right thing even though it brings him little praise and even less joy. The fact that "the right thing" is often painful and dangerous to him as well is almost for me beside the point. I am of course as eager for July as anyone, and all the questions will be answered then. But I am also dreading July as well, because I feel in my bones that Snape will die, and I for one will mourn him. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sun Feb 4 03:21:20 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 03:21:20 -0000 Subject: FILK: H-O-R-C-R-U-X Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164579 H-O-R-C-R-U-X To the tune of Tammy Wynette's D-I-V-O-R-C-E You can see her perform it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_cj4mfcE5A Dedicated to CV (whose initials are to be found in Wynette's title) NOTE: My premise in this song is that Voldemort, after he acquired one, came to believe it unlucky to actually say the word Horcrux (just like you can't say "Macbeth" if you're appearing in a stage performance of the play). VOLDEMORT: My fiendish plan's to split my soul in seven different parts With a spell that's the worst of all the evil Darkest Arts So that is why it's like my name, that's better left unsaid But the word that I can only spell >From my cave, alas, has fled. My H-O-R-C-R-U-X has been stolen away That S.O.B. R.A.B, how he's going to pay I shall get him ASAP and he'll be facing my worst hex He'll rue the day he took my H-O-R-C-R-U-X. On an isle, I hid my locket With some folks who died They lived within a cavern I with magic fortified With spells I cast for hurting those Who would dare to mess with me But now I am a victim of A Grimmauld B & E My H-O-R-C-R-U-X has been stolen away That S.O.B. R.A.B, how he's going to pay I hang him by his You-Know-Whats, he'll nevermore have sex He'll rue the day he swiped my H-O-R-C-R-U-X. - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 03:38:24 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 03:38:24 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164580 > wynnleaf: > 3. JKR has had Harry time and again reject Dumbledore's trust in > Snape. Therefore Harry, as DDM!Harry, will come to trust DDM!Snape. > > Harry can forgive Snape in a dying!Snape scene. But it takes time to > build trust. So I think that Harry will have some time over the > course of DH to overcome his hatred, forgive Snape, *and* learn to > trust him. So no forgiveness while Snape is dying -- it's too quick. > > But that doesn't mean Snape will live. > > I am very curious as to what those of you who agree with DDM!Snape > think. Will Snape live or die and why? zgirnius: You took the words out of my mouth as far as what I think will happen with Snape and Harry. To answer your question: though I would be thrilled to be wrong, I expect that Snape will die in DH. Only after, as you say, Harry has time to change his mind about him. I'm not exactly sure why, it just seems the more powerful ending to his story. And, someone is going to. I really do think Rowling's comments about killing people off in DH are heartfelt - she wants the (I presume) victory to come at a cost. I don't think she'll kill Harry. She likes him too much. For the same reason, she's not killing off Ron or Hermione or Ginny, because that would be as bad for Harry as actually dying, I would think. So, I guess I am looking at the characters and trying to see whose death, of those I have not already eliminated, would be most impactful for Harry and the readers. And I am coming up with Snape, assuming I'm right about his story, naturally. Slowly bring the readers, along with Harry, to realize that this guy's whole life since he 'returned' has been to try and atone for what he did by first, trying to save the Potters, and later, trying to protect Harry and help in the defeat of Voldemort. And that his life before that wasn't much to smile about either. And then, when we and Harry are seeing him in a different and far better light, wham, a tragic death. Rowling has said that she was really moved by the end of "Tale of Two Cities". I fear Snape is her Carton, even if his Lucie is long dead. Also, I got a really bad feeling from the Unbreakable Vow scene. And it was not Dumbledore-centered. Yes, Snape is currently in a tough spot, but that fiery rope imagery was just creepy. Or maybe it's a psychological defense mechanism . I really don't want him to die. This way, if it happens, I am prepared for the worst. --zgirnius, who will be picking up a precautionary box of Kleenex on her way home from the midnight release party at her B&N, early on July 22. From muellem at bc.edu Sun Feb 4 05:04:28 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 05:04:28 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164581 > > wynnleaf: > > 3. JKR has had Harry time and again reject Dumbledore's trust in > > Snape. Therefore Harry, as DDM!Harry, will come to trust DDM!Snape. > > > > Harry can forgive Snape in a dying!Snape scene. But it takes time > to > > build trust. So I think that Harry will have some time over the > > course of DH to overcome his hatred, forgive Snape, *and* learn to > > trust him. So no forgiveness while Snape is dying -- it's too > quick. > > > > But that doesn't mean Snape will live. > > > > I am very curious as to what those of you who agree with DDM!Snape > > think. Will Snape live or die and why? colebiancardi here: I am of the mind that Snape will live. I don't know what will happen to him after book 7 - ie does he go back to Hogwarts with his credentials intact, open up his own business, move to another country, become a grumpy old man, find the love o' his life, marry and have 10 kids? but I think he will live. JKR wished Snape a Happy Birthday this year - doesn't that mean he will survive book 7? Or is that just speculation? I always thought that if she wished one of her characters a happy birthday, that means, in Potter-land, that character is alive today, as the books are now about 10 years in the past. Has any character ever been wished a happy birthday but died in the books so far? anyway, that is why I think Snape will live - slim pickings, I know. colebiancardi From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 06:03:40 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 06:03:40 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164582 Carol earlier: > > Carol, who thinks that Snape is made of sterner stuff than you > > evidently do (but believes that he's currently suffering mental > > anguish over the death of Dumbledore) > > wynnleaf responded: > I find I mostly agree with your views on Snape. I did not agree with your earlier post where you said that you didn't think he was mortally afraid of Voldemort. He may not be "mortally" afraid (wonder what that really means?), but he's intelligent, therefore he *has* to be afraid of Voldemort. And since he's engaged in a seriously risky endeavor, in which he can easily get tortured and killed at Voldemort's hand or his command, it would make sense that he fear Voldemort with a mortal fear. > > Also, fear does not negate bravery. In fact, Snape is *more* brave, if while fearing Voldemort, he goes to him anyway as a spy. Brave people are not unafraid; they just go ahead with what they must do in spite of their fear. Snape would be a fool to not fear Voldemort. Carol responds: I guess we're dealing with semantics here because I read "mortally afraid" as intensely afraid or terrified, as exemplified by Lily Potter faced with a Voldemort about to AK her child. (The fact that she offers her life for Harry's despite such abject terror does indeed make her exceptionally brave.) So while I agree that Snape must, as an intelligent man, be afraid of Voldemort, quite aware that he walks a tightrope and the slightest wrong move could kill him (or at least earn him a Crucio), I don't see him a *mortally* afraid of Voldemort or he'd never be able to do his job. He reminds me of Starbuck in "Moby Dick," who doesn't want a man in his boat who's not afraid of a whale. As Starbuck says, a fearless man is more dangerous than a coward. You have to know what you're facing, what it can do to you, and face it anyway. That's what Snape is doing when he leaves the hospital room to face Voldemort. He's pale, his eyes are glittering, he knows he could die, and he does it anyway, chooses to do it, because Dumbledore is relying on him: "'Severus,' said Dumbledore, turning to Snape, "you know what I must ask you to do. If you are ready . . . If you are prepared . . ." "'I am,' said Snape. "He looked slightly paler than usual, and his cold black eyes glittered strangely" (GoF Am. ed. 713). Dumbledore watches apprehensively as Snape sweeps out the door, remaining silent for minutes afterwards. Both he and Snape know exactly what he's facing. It's very much like Harry going down the corridor in SS/PS: "The other two stared at him. His face was pale and his eyes were glittering. 'I'm going out of her tonight and I'm going to try to get to the stone first.' "'You're mad!' said Ron. "'You can't!'" said Hermione. . . . "'SO WHAT?' Harry shouted. "Don't you understand? If Snape gets hold of the stone, Voldemort's coming back. . . ." (SS Am. ed. 270). Harry is wrong about Snape, of course, but he, too, is facing a Dark wizard who could kill him (Quirrellmort, as it turns out) because he feels he must. As you say, there are several kinds of courage. There's the overcoming of sheer terror, like Ron facing the spiders in the Forbidden Forest. There's the reckless kind of courage, if it can be called that, the fearless risk-taking of WPP running with a werewolf on a full moon night. And there's something in between, neither fearless nor overcoming abject terror, the willingness to confront danger or evil because it's right. Snape and Harry are both afraid, but neither is mortally afraid. Both are courageous but neither is fearless. Call it intelligent courage if that works for you. I was comparing Snape with the cowards Karkaroff and Wormtail, both of whom are mortally afraid of Voldemort, one of whom fears to face him and the other to defy him. Snape, IMO, fears to do neither. wynnleaf: > I read a lot of Cassy's website and notice that she believes Snape > will die and Harry will forgive Snape as he dies. > > I disagree with this because I believe that JKR has set Harry up to do 3 things in regards to Snape. > > 1. JKR has made a big point of Harry's hatred of Snape growing more > and more personal. Therefore, Harry must overcome his hatred of > Snape. And JKR won't let him destroy Voldemort with his power the > dark lord knows not of -- love -- until he overcomes that hatred. > > 2. JKR has had Harry think that he will "never" forgive Snape. > Therefore Harry will forgive Snape. > > 3. JKR has had Harry time and again reject Dumbledore's trust in > Snape. Therefore Harry, as DDM!Harry, will come to trust DDM!Snape. Carol: I agree on all counts. "He would never forgive Snape. Never!" jumps out at me as the unreliable narrator being right about Harry's state of mind but wrong, wrong, wrong as to his prediction. > wynnleaf: > Harry can forgive Snape in a dying!Snape scene. But it takes time to build trust. So I think that Harry will have some time over the > course of DH to overcome his hatred, forgive Snape, *and* learn to > trust him. So no forgiveness while Snape is dying -- it's too quick. > > But that doesn't mean Snape will live. > > I am very curious as to what those of you who agree with DDM!Snape > think. Will Snape live or die and why? > > wynnleaf > Carol: Like zgirnius upthread, I had a terrible foreboding when I read the scene with those hellish ropes of fire binding Snape's wand arm in the final moments of "Spinner's End." But I'm hoping that what was foreshadowed was his unwilling murder of Dumbledore, not his own death. How is Snape to tell his own story, to answer all our questions, if he dies saving Harry or one of his friends? We've read the hero-villain or villain-hero dying repentant and redeemed too many times. It's highly unlikely that JKR can top Boromir's death scene, and Harry is no Aragorn to bless him and grant him absolution. I want Snape to be not only forgiven but understood, and no quick death scene can give us that. I want him to *live* redeemed and accomplish something important with his brilliant mind and many talents. I don't know how JKR can manage it, but I can certainly see Snape, still sarcastic and intolerant of dunderheads, conducting research in Potions and/or DADA for the MoM or St. Mungo's. Why give him Healing skills in HBP if he's not going to use them in DH, at least in the epilogue? I know you asked for what we think rather than what we want, so I'll just say that I think he's been set up for redemption since Book 1, and I think he's the character to whom she granted a reprieve in Book 7. I hope, however, that's it's a long reprieve, not just a postponement. JKR prides herself on not giving us what we expect to find. Many if not most readers expect Snape to die. That being the case, I predict that he won't. And if he goes to Azkaban, it will be a short sentence, no more than five years. Carol, who, like zgirnius, will have a box of tissues handy and hope they're used for someone other than Snape (or Harry) From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Feb 4 06:11:03 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 06:11:03 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter is not a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164583 Carol responds: > JKR merely needs to introduce an explanation for how Harry acquired > some of Voldemort's *powers.* Nothing has been said by DD or anyone > else to indicate that his scar includes a bit of Voldemort's *soul.* > It's no less likely that powers, which are intangible, could enter > Harry's forehead through the cut (which must have been caused by the > spell bursting outward since an AK doesn't cause a mark or wound) > than that a floating soul bit, also intangible, could do so. Jen: Not less likely, just not that different. We know Voldemort put a 'bit of himself' in Harry, that 'neither can live while the other survives' and that the key to Voldemort's ultimate defeat is destroying 'bits' of himself. At the very least we are looking at a really tremendous red herring! The hows and whys, the mechanics of an accidental horcrux or a transfer of powers, seem impossible to predict. Since neither one has ever happened in the history of the WW (or we simply don't know in the case of an accidental Horcrux), her limitation is the boundaries of her own imagination and a very few bits of canon in each case. I would argue she's not even constrained by the mechanics of her own spellcasting if she doesn't choose to be, the premise for the whole series is based on an unprecendented event! Carol: > I've also postulated that since blood has magical properties, > whether its wizards' blood or dragon's blood or unicorn blood, that > Voldie's powers could have entered Harry's open wound through a > drop of blood, surely at least as plausible as a bit of intangible > soul entering him without possessing him (we know he isn't > possessed) and without a spell (absurdly) preparing the child LV is > trying to kill to become a Horcrux. Jen: I find that plausible. If a soul bit could get past Lily's protection then the powers could make it in just as easily. And this would fit in with the significance of blood in the series. I can't remember now, does it say anywhere if there was time between LV killing Lily and attempting to kill Harry? I'm assuming if he went to GH to prepare his final Horcrux he had time to prepare the container before murdering Harry (unless there's canon saying Lily's murder and Harry's attempted one happened in quick sucession). Carol: > As for the complications I was speaking of, I'm talking about the > stand off. How can Harry kill Voldemort or otherwise destroy him if > he or his scar is a Horcrux anchoring Voldie's soul to the earth? > We'd have Vapormort all over again. And if Voldemort killed Harry, > inadvertently destroying one of his Horcruxes, how could Dead!Harry > kill him? They AK each other? I don't think Harry will use AK as his > weapon. They fall off Reichenbach Falls together? Jen: I don't see this as a problem that can't be adequately explained with the power of magic. People have proposed everything from removing the soul bit from the scar only to the soul bit dying in the locked room because it can't withstand the power to...I can't remember all the proposals. The diary and the ring are the only evidence we have and both containers still exist after the soul bit died even if both are 'wounded'. The only reason the containers aren't completely intact is the method of soul disposal. So the real question seems to be how to destroy the soul piece in a way that doesn't mortally wound the container (which sounds easier if the soul piece is in the scar only). Carol: > I think that Harry will defeat Voldemort through the power of Love > (his willingness to sacrifice himself, not necessarily meaning that > he will actually die) and through another power peculiar to > Voldemort that he acquired at GH, the power of possession. (Please > refer to my previous posts on this topic if you're interested.) Jen: I've read your theory and find the idea of Harry using possession to be a moral problem and harmful to his power. Unlike Parseltoungue, we have no evidence that the 'good or the great' use possession. It's supposed to be heinous, taking away free will even more completely than the Imperius and Harry will be using the darkest of magic if he possesses Voldemort. If you don't like the idea of Harry using an AK, why is possession a better option? Both are weapons of dark magic. > Carol: > Anyway, those are my reasons for not believing that Harry is a > Horcrux, nor will I believe it until and unless I read it in DH, at > which time I'll ask Alla for her recipe for crow ;-) Jen: I don't like Harry as a Horcrux even though I understand why so many people have come to this conclusion. I'd rather see something like Voldemort transferring the last of his *good* powers to Harry (whatever those might be), marking Harry as something akin to his equal-yet-opposite. He's the only irredeemably evil character in the series which means there's absolutely no good left in him now. Whatever the solution is, I hope it's not a dratted soul piece. Jen From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Sun Feb 4 04:22:03 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 23:22:03 -0500 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Will Snape live or die and why? References: Message-ID: <002201c74814$08a14140$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164584 leslie: <> <> _ First, I'd like to say hello to everyone. I am new to the group but a long time HP fan. I have pre-ordered DH from Amazon the day it was announced and can't wait until July. I am also a Snape supporter, but I only partially agree with the comments from leslie41. I'm not sure how I feel about Snape dying to save Harry. He may be a casualty in DH, but I have some theories on how Harry may come to trust him. In keeping up with the comments and clues from JKR in her interviews, she mentions that something will come to light about Lily Potter that we never knew. I've noticed that Snape hates James, Sirius and Lupin, but never really says anything much about Lily. So, my theory is that perhaps Snape was in love with Lily or they may have even had a relationship at one time before James and Lily began dating in their 7th year. This would explain a lot about why Snape hated James so much and why he protects Harry even though he hates part of him. I'm sure he sees James in Harry, but also knows that part of him is all that's left of Lily. It may also be that Lily's murder at the hands of Voldemort, was what caused Snape to leave the Deatheaters and join the order. Dumbledore may be the only one whom Snape confided in about Lily and that may be why he trusts Snape. My hope is that in his haste to leave Hogwarts, the pensieve holding Snape's memories was left behind and Harry learns more about Snape through this. There was a major breakthrough when Harry saw Snape's memories before in OotP. Harry can identify with Snape and after seeing him bullied, he even questioned who James really was. I don't doubt that James and Lily are Harry's parents. Even though there has been speculation that Harry was actually Dumbledore's or Voldemort's son, these theories have been confirmed as false by JKR. Harry looks too much like James and Lily to have been parented by someone else, but I do think that Snape's love of Lily is what drives this part of the story. That is the unknown power of love that Voldemort hasn't learned which may be his undoing. If anyone is to die to save Harry, I would expect Wormtail, since he owes Harry a life debt. Aunt Petunia also has secrets which we have not yet discovered. So based on things that JKR has slipped us in her interviews, I think that one of those two may die or surprise us somehow in helping Harry. Finally, I agree that Snape shows extreme discipline in doing what he does in such a thankless role. He must be driven by something very deep. To murder the one person who showed him any trust, friendship or respect over the last 15 years must have stung pretty badly. But he still managed it and saved Draco and Harry. Whether it was planned in advance or not, it must've been very difficult to handle. I also agree that Snape would crush Luscious Malfoy. I'd rather Harry, Ron or Hermione had at him though. Cheers, Ronin From va32h at comcast.net Sun Feb 4 06:26:25 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 06:26:25 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164585 wynnleaf writes: > > I am very curious as to what those of you who agree with DDM!Snape > > think. Will Snape live or die and why? va32h here: I think Snape will die because I just don't see a future for him, once Voldemort is gone and Snape's role as spy is no longer need by either side. He basically sacrficed his life, once he returned to his role as double agent. Even if he is redeemed in the end (as I think he will be) there would still be too many people remembering him as the man who killed Dumbledore. And of course there is no Dumbledore around this time, as there was after the last WW, to vouch for Snape and give him employment. I think Snape is much like Sirius - a tragic figure whose life has been so consumed with one goal that, having achieved it, seems suddenly empty and frustratingly pointless. Sirius focused so much on finding Wormtail, avenging James and Lily, then later hiding from the Ministry. Left alone at 12GP, with no task to focus on, he became dangerously unhinged. Snape has spent his entire adult life - save one interlude - walking the dangerous line between good and evil. Also like Sirius, he may thrive on that danger, and feel restless and bored without it. I never thought Sirius would live through the series either, really. I couldn't picture either man settling down to a quiet, ordinary life. va32h, who is rather stoic about character deaths (except Harry, not Harry! Anyone but Harry!) From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 09:53:12 2007 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 09:53:12 -0000 Subject: FILK: I'll Second-Guess that Potion Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164586 "I'll Second-Guess that Potion" to the tune of "I Second that Emotion" by Smokey Robinson. To Potioncat, who would probably make some interesting potions herself. Sev Snape, sixth year potions student, is doing his homework for Slughorn. Seeing room for improvements, he makes a few adjustments, scribbling them in the margins of his book. He sings: Maybe you want to add some parrot's feet. That ingred'ent's one I will delete. Maybe you think you need a dash of gall, But a skosh of monkey tears will do it all. (chorus) Oh, oh, This book has simply got no heart. 'Cuz potion-making is an art. Oh, but I think I have what it takes, To set this thing in motion. I'll second-guess that potion. Yeah, I won't blindly follow with Lobotomized devotion. I'll second-guess that potion. I see my first batch of Felix turned out brown. It should have been clear; that made me frown. If I throw in a parsnip as it cools, It turns out fine, so I say "screw the rules". (chorus) repeat verses and chorus- fade out last chorus. Ginger, who wishes she had the HBP for her medical microbiology labs. From gbethman at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 07:27:38 2007 From: gbethman at yahoo.com (Gopal B) Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 23:27:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: <1170570004.2482.48613.m47@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <831161.88925.qm@web38807.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164587 loves_the_lit: I too have been wondering what or whom could the Halllows refer to. Gopal B: I am letting my ideas run wild here..... I think a 'Hallow' is something a wizard/ witch would try to protect/ make pure even at the cost of their life. This may mean transferring their whole souls into that object. I think this is a direct opposite of the horcrux. Just like voldemort made horcruxes, we are seeing that Harry has had many saviours- who transformed to many Hallows. we can see this from James, Lily, Cedric, Sirius, Dumbledore- (and maybe Hagrid, Pettigrew or Snape in 7th book); who all died protecting harry. I think Harry would surely have been killed if they had not laid down their lives- though this does not take anything away from Harry's heroics. I think the 7th book will be about Harry reliving the lives of his Hallows, and realizing how he has been saved rather than hunting voldemort's horcruxes. That realization itself will empower him to fight/ kill voldemort more than anything else. And that's why he has to start from where it all began- at Godric's Hollow. And maybe each of his Hallows have been able to neutralize atleast one of voldemort's horcrux. We see Lily's sacrifice taking one voldemort out and the blood weakening another, Dumbledore took out ring horcrux, maybe Sirius and Regulus were together on the locket horcrux. Maybe Harry himself will take out the last evil horcrux out and voldemort will be a good man again. Gopal B. From loves_the_lit at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 14:48:09 2007 From: loves_the_lit at yahoo.com (loves_the_lit) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 14:48:09 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: <831161.88925.qm@web38807.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164588 > Gopal B: > I am letting my ideas run wild here..... > > > I think a 'Hallow' is something a wizard/ witch would > try to protect/ make pure even at the cost of their > life. This may mean transferring their whole souls > into that object. > > Carol and Snow both sent me interesting comments. Carol also sent me links to some threads from Dec about the meaning of Hallows and some ideas, which were helpful. I had been thinking that the hallows might be the actual ghosts at Hogwarts, such as Nick and the Baron. But equally valid could be speculation on hallows being a place in Hogwarts, the spirits of the founders, or the spirits produced by priori incantatem. Or as you propose, all those who died to save Harry (and the whole wizarding world, for that matter). But as far as Voldemort being saved? I doubt it. JRR believes there is such as thing as evil. And evil has to be fought. I don't think she believes that all the love and magic in the world could have saved Hitler. He just had to be stopped. That's why the prophecy states that for Harry and Voldemort, in the end, neither can survive while the other one lives. loves_the_lit From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Sun Feb 4 13:01:22 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 08:01:22 -0500 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 References: Message-ID: <001001c7485c$93a16ed0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164589 va32h here: I think Snape will die because I just don't see a future for him, once Voldemort is gone and Snape's role as spy is no longer need by either side. >> Greetings, I agree that Sirius was dangerously unhinged when he was stuck in hiding at 12GP. I don't think this will be Snape's fate though. Snape seems much more disciplined than any other character. He's managed to walk the line for over a decade with no need of any type of acclaim or rewards from fellow members of the order. Sirius also endured a long stint at Azkaban which took it's toll on him before being forced into hiding. Sirius was used to being around a tight knit group of friends and receiving constant attention, whereas Snape was always an outsider. Mainly, I think that just because someone's role in life changes doesn't mean they have to die. As one chapter of life ends, a new one begins. Someone like Snape could easily find a new niche and may be quite relieved that he can now pursue something more peaceful. Maybe he will finally take up the roll of DADA teacher at Hogwarts. (If the curse is lifted from the position) or maybe he will become the new Headmaster. Maybe he will take a vacation from the wizarding world and become a fisherman. But my point is that just because he is no longer needed as a double agent, he doesn't have to die. I would find that conclusion more plausible if it were not the final book of the series. Ronin From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Feb 4 17:59:00 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 4 Feb 2007 17:59:00 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 2/4/2007, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1170611940.18.79779.m47@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164590 Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday February 4, 2007 1:00 pm - 1:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Location: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Notes: Just a reminder, Sunday chat starts in about one hour. To get to the HPfGU room follow this link: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Create a user name for yourself, whatever you want to be called. Enter the password: hpfguchat Click "Join Chat" on the lower right. Chat start times: 11 am Pacific US 12 noon Mountain US 1 pm Central US 2 pm Eastern US 7 pm UK All Rights Reserved Copyright 2007 Yahoo! Inc. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 18:02:09 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 18:02:09 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Will Snape live or die and why? In-Reply-To: <002201c74814$08a14140$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164591 Ronin wrote: > I am also a Snape supporter, but I only partially agree with the comments from leslie41. Carol responds: Ditto. (Looks over her shoulder for List Elves. Hey, there's more coming!) > Ronin: > I'm not sure how I feel about Snape dying to save Harry. He may be a casualty in DH, but I have some theories on how Harry may come to trust him. In keeping up with the comments and clues from JKR in her interviews, she mentions that something will come to light about Lily Potter that we never knew. I've noticed that Snape hates James, Sirius and Lupin, but never really says anything much about Lily. So, my theory is that perhaps Snape was in love with Lily or they may have even had a relationship at one time before James and Lily began dating in their 7th year. > > This would explain a lot about why Snape hated James so much and why he protects Harry even though he hates part of him. I'm sure he sees James in Harry, but also knows that part of him is all that's left of Lily. It may also be that Lily's murder at the hands of Voldemort, was what caused Snape to leave the Deatheaters and join the order. Dumbledore may be the only one whom Snape confided in about Lily and that may be why he trusts Snape. Carol responds: I'd say that about three-quarters of the DDM!Snapers agree with you (and I know of at least one Snape-hater who's considering the possibility). I see no evidence of any Snape/Lily relationship, only an absence of evidence that he hates her, which can easily be explained by her noninvolvement in the so-called Prank, which, according to Dumbledore as well as Snape, could have resulted in Teen!Severus's death. I think he genuinely tried to prevent her death and Harry's because he was appalled by Voldemort's interpretation of the Prophecy and James's death because he didn't want James to die with the life debt unpaid and that both his anger at James for having the arrogance to trust Sirius Black and the nerve to die without allowing him to repay the life debt are real, however irrational, and that he continues to hate James's memory (and Black and Lupin) all the more after he learns that he's been wrong for twelve years about Black being the SK and the traitor, based primarily, I suppose, on Black's lack of remorse for the "Prank." (Wormtail, the real murderer and traitor, he merely regards with sublime contempt.) I think he called Lily a "Mudblood" once because he was as embarrassed and humiliated by her interference as by James's and Sirius's bullying (and using his own spells against him). In a fair fight, he could have given James a run for his money. (Lupin, IIRC, says that he usually gave as good as he got.) And their being in NEWT Potions together proves nothing. Hermione and Draco both got O's in Potions (Harry and Ron are the only two who got in with E's and needed books and supplies because they didn't anticipate being in the class), but they're neither study partners nor friends. I certainly don't think, as some DDM!Snapers do, that Snape made some sort of bargain with Voldemort to spare Lily. Snape had already gone over to Dumbledore's side and spied for him "at great personal risk" sometime before he began teaching at Hogwarts, which would have been two months before Godric's Hollow. IOW, it wasn't the Potters' *deaths* that made him turn against Voldemort. He had already done so months before, perhaps right around the time of Harry's and Neville's births. > Ronin: > My hope is that in his haste to leave Hogwarts, the pensieve holding Snape's memories was left behind and Harry learns more about Snape through this. Carol responds: You don't store memories in a Pensieve longterm. Snape puts his memories back into his head after each Occlumency lesson, and would certainly have done the same after Harry's excursion into his "worst" memory. And after that, he returned the Pensieve to its owner, Dumbledore. DD stored memories he obtained from other people (and a few of his own memories) in vials. He did not store them in the Pensieve. (Presumably he puts them back in their labeled containers when he's through showing them to Harry as they're not in the Pensieve the next time he has a lesson.) Whether DD stored any of Snape's memories, we don't know, but he may have stored some of his own memories of conversations with Snape in anticipation of his own death and willed them, along with the Pensieve, to Harry. That would solve a lot of problems, but, then, we've already had some seven or so complete Pensieve memories (three at once in GoF) and several partial ones (people rising out of the Pensieve to speak, a skill Harry obviously hasn't mastered), so it's likely that JKR will reserve the Pensieve excursions for really important memories--which leaves Snape himself to explain the rest, a la Lupin and Black in PoA. Ronin: > > If anyone is to die to save Harry, I would expect Wormtail, since he owes Harry a life debt. Carol responds: Here I agree with you, only Wormtail's act won't be a selfless demonstration of loyalty to Dumbledore. It will be an attempt to pay his life debt to Harry--something to do with that silver hand, which is clearly in the books for a reason. And yet it's unclear why he didn't try to save Harry in GoF when he had the chance--just dump Voldie in the cauldron without taking any bone, flesh, or blood, released Harry, and run for it. I guess he thought it was too late--he'd already murdered Cedric. Or he was too terrified of Voldemort, even in fetal form, to think at all. (But Wormtail is a self-serving, cowardly traitor and murderer. If he's redeemed, showing remorse a la Boromir, I'll be violently ill. No offense to any Wormtail fans. Are there any?) > Ronin: > Finally, I agree that Snape shows extreme discipline in doing what he does in such a thankless role. He must be driven by something very deep. To murder the one person who showed him any trust, friendship or respect over the last 15 years must have stung pretty badly. But he still managed it and saved Draco and Harry. Whether it was planned in advance or not, it must've been very difficult to handle. Carol: Exactly. He also saved Harry from a Crucio and got the DEs out of Hogwarts, and sending DD over the wall prevented Greyback from having him for "afters." Ronin: I also agree that Snape would crush Luscious Malfoy. I'd rather Harry, Ron or Hermione had at him though. Carol responds: Erm, Luscious? Makes him sound like a hot fudge sundae. Personally, I think that Snape will bring the entire Malfoy family around to an anti-Voldemort perspective, perhaps even rescuing Lucius from Azkaban. But what do I know? I expected a prison break in HBP and I thought that Snape would continue as Potions master, with the lion man from JKR's website (Rufus Scrimgeour) as the new DADA teacher and HBP! Carol, who doesn't think that HRH will "crush" anyone except Voldemort and hopes that the Order (Snape included) will get to work and do the "crushing" (minus any Unforgiveable Curses, which IMO, corrupt the soul even when they don't split it, as shown by the Crouches Sr. and Jr.) From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Feb 4 18:23:18 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 18:23:18 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164592 > Pippin: > I'm not sure where this is coming from. The Potters *died* to > keep Harry alive. I think that's a pretty strong statement of > their wishes. Jen: Thank you. That's the piece I overlooked to confirm Dumbledore very much considered the Potters' wishes. I sometimes find myself losing sight of points when looking at an event from a new angle. Pippin: > The light in Dumbledore's eyes usually shows itself when he's > amused or pleased about something. Of course he wouldn't be > pleased about having to leave Harry at the Dursleys. But it seems > like a leap to say that his compassion for Harry's suffering had > to die so that he could do such a thing. I think his heart > was aching, but it would be a poor return for James and Lily's > sacrifice if he let their son be murdered to salve his own > feelings. Jen: I've been trying to figure out exactly what we're debating here. I *think* you're saying that because Dumbledore made the right decision he didn't need to dwell on his feelings about the Dursley piece of the plan. That in his mind he was giving Harry a life and a future and therefore a choice about the prophecy, something much more crucial than what Harry might suffer at the Dursleys. I'm saying that I agree with the choice Dumbledore made and the reasoning behind it because Harry had extraordinary circumstances. Keeping him alive after everything that happened trumped other considerations for Dumbledore, who recognized Harry's choice would involve not just his own life but the entire WW. But Dumbledore also believes love is crucially important. The choice he made for the blood protection was a 'shield' of Lily's love which Dumbledore described in PS this way 'to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who loved us is gone, will give us some protection forever.' (chap. 17) So I think love was on his mind when he chose for Harry, Dumbledore seems like a person who would find it heartbreaking to 'condemn', (doom, sentence) infant Harry to a place where he might not experience love no matter how certain he is of his plan. When explaining everything to Harry, Dumbledore talked as if he expected *Harry* might not accept his choices. DD said Harry would likely be more angry than he already was, that he would 'rage' at him. He anticipated questions Harry didn't even ask like 'why not the nice wizarding family'? My guess is Dumbledore had asked *himself* those questions and pondered his options before realizing the only way to protect Harry was the blood charm and, therefore, the Dursleys. So perhaps I'm taking it too far to say his compassion for Harry died or was buried inside his compassion for the entire WW, but it doesn't seem far enough to me to say Dumbledore was merely not 'pleased' about the situation, especially given Dumbledore's insistence that 'the ability to love' is Harry's power. His speech indicates he wasn't completely certain what kind of person Harry would be when he returned to the WW, that he considered the Dursleys a risk he had to take. Pippin: > This whole too much thing is again part of that older culture > that says feelings aren't to be trusted. And Dumbledore is > struggling with that, working his way to the idea that > his love for Harry was not a mistake, or if so it was a felix > culpa. (OOP is the book of 'felix culpa', Dumbledore even > refers to it when he says a "lucky mistake" brought him > to Harry's hearing on time.) Jen: I don't believe it's connected to a cultural thing so much as Dumbledore realizing his flaw was actually his strength, it allowed him to connect with Harry. That realization may have even played into Dumbledore's understanding of Harry's power. Anyway, I agree with your basic premise since I said something similar in my last post. Pippin: > But it's not as if Dumbledore had a choice between Petunia and > some other relative of Lily's who could have provided a > nurturing home. If Rowling wanted Dumbledore's choice > to be about that, about Dumbledore deciding that nurture > would be bad for Harry, she could easily have created such a > relative, (Mark Evans, anyone?) but she didn't. > > Dumbledore feels very strongly that pampering would be > bad for Harry, but I think it's a misunderstanding to equate > pampering with nurture and love. Doing so is so far > from Dumbledore's thinking that I'm sure he feels he > doesn't need to explain the difference -- leaving his > readers just where Rowling wants them, ie thinking about it. Jen: I'm assuming these comments are directed to the thread in general as they've not come up in our particular discusssion. My best guess for the 'pampered prince' comment comes from something JKR said about Dudley: "I feel sorry for Dudley. I might joke about him, but I feel truly sorry for him because I see him as just as abused as Harry. Though, in possibly a less obvious way. What they are doing to him is inept, really. I think children recognize that. Poor Dudley. He's not being prepared for the world at all, in any reasonable or compassionate way, so I feel sorry for him." (Cinescape, Nov. 2000) So, whether people agree with JKR or not, Dumbledore seems to be speaking for her convictions here. Pippin: > "SIRIUS DESERVED WHAT HE GOT" is the same, IMO, so far > from Dumbledore's thinking that it didn't occur to him that his > words would sound that way to Harry, just as he didn't > expect Harry to put so much weight on the prophecy. Jen: Yes, I agree with your first comment. This is similar to what I said previously: "And when Harry calls him on it, tells him how his words actually sound to Harry, 'SO SIRIUS ACTUALLY DESERVED WHAT HE GOT', Dumbledore starts to back off until, 'I was trying to keep Sirius alive', said Dumbledore quietly." Re: the prophecy, I wonder what DD would have done had there been no eavesdropper? Even he was impressed with Trelawney's 'prediction'. Jen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 18:46:28 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 18:46:28 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164593 loves_the_lit wrote: > Carol and Snow both sent me interesting comments. Carol also sent me links to some threads from Dec about the meaning of Hallows and some ideas, which were helpful. I had been thinking that the hallows might be the actual ghosts at Hogwarts, such as Nick and the Baron. But equally valid could be speculation on hallows being a place in Hogwarts, the spirits of the founders, or the spirits produced by priori incantatem. Or as you propose, all those who died to save Harry (and the whole wizarding world, for that matter). But as far as Voldemort being saved? I doubt it. JRR believes there is such as thing as evil. And evil has to be fought. I don't think she believes that all the love and magic in the world could have saved Hitler. He just had to be stopped. That's why the prophecy states that for Harry and Voldemort, in the end, neither can survive while the other one lives. Carol responds: I'm glad you found the links interesting. As I said offlist, I think that the Deathly Hallows is a place (cf. "the Hallows" in LOTR), possibly a catacomblike place where the Founders (except probably Slytherin) are buried. (I like catlady's idea of bring back Salazar to join the others as part of the reunification of the Houses, but that could be relegated to the Epilogue rather than central to the plot.) I'm not wedded to any theory, but I hope that the Hallows, whoever or whatever they are, are more important than the Horcruxes, maybe somehow their antithesis. FWIW, it's "neither can live while the other survives," not vice versa. I take the phrase to mean that neither Harry nor Voldie is really living now: Voldie is just a tattered soul remnant in a reconstructed body surviving on borrowed time even though he thinks he's immortal; if Harry, the only person with the power to destroy him, were to die, perhaps Voldie could truly live (in a body that would somehow have to be made immortal and immune to spells, poisons, illness, and aging). I'm not convinced, really, that he could ever live, having sacrificed his humanity and most of his soul, as reflected in his snakelike appearance, but at least he wouldn't have to worry about any earthly enemy wiping out his existence altogether. Harry is "surviving" in a more figurative sense, putting love and ambition and even education on hold until he can destroy Voldemort, at which time he can become Just!Harry, an ordinary young wizard (the WW is fickle and will forget about him eventually)--or maybe live to one hundred, marry Ginny, have twelve red-haired children who play Quidditch, and become Minister for Magic, to elaborate on Trelawney's prediction. I think he'll lose whatever powers he acquired from Voldemort but retain his own. IOW, he'll *live* rather than surviving, perhaps becoming a talented Auror once he ceases to be the Chosen One. You raise an interesting point regarding the nature of evil in the HP books: "JKR believes there is such a thing as evil. And evil has to be fought." But what *is* evil in JKR's view? Is it a negative, the absence of good (as cold is the absence of heat and darkness is the absence of light)? Or is it an essence in itself? In SS/PS, Quirrell quotes Voldemort as saying, "There is no such thing as good and evil, only power and those too weak to use it." This view must, of course, be the antithesis of JKR's (and Dumbledore's), which suggests that she does she both good and evil as essences of some sort. It also suggests that evil has something to do with imposing power on others (hence the Unforgiveable Curses, which I think are Unforgiveable in more than the sense that their use will result in a life sentence to Azkaban--and yet I think, somehow, that Snape will be forgiven for using one because of the circumstances in which he imposed his power to kill on the already dying Dumbledore). Wh *is* evil in the HP books? And is Darkness merely the absence of Light? (Are some spells "grey" because they're neutral and can be used for good or evil and others Dark because they can only be used to harm, or at least were intended for that purpose, and because they impose the will and power of one person on another even when they're used in a seemingly innocent manner such as making students hop on one foot around a classroom?) Carol, thinking that JKR has a lot more questions to answer than what motivates Snape and whether Harry is a Horcrux (or what the Hallows are, which is at least certain to be answered!) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 19:32:59 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 19:32:59 -0000 Subject: Dursleys or Death (was Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164594 Jen R. wrote: When explaining everything to Harry, Dumbledore talked as if he expected *Harry* might not accept his choices. DD said Harry would likely be more angry than he already was, that he would 'rage' at him. He anticipated questions Harry didn't even ask like 'why not the nice wizarding family'? My guess is Dumbledore had asked *himself* those questions and pondered his options before realizing the only way to protect Harry was the blood charm and, therefore, the Dursleys. His speech indicates he wasn't completely certain what kind of person Harry would be when he returned to the WW, that he considered the Dursleys a risk he had to take. Carol responds: Yes. Good deduction, Jen. A calculate risk but clearly the lesser of two evils even if the Dursleys didn't love him. And I still think that the Muggle world was a safer place for Harry even without the blood protection than the WW, where he could not have been hidden from either DEs or adoring fans. Pippin: > > Dumbledore feels very strongly that pampering would be bad for Harry, but I think it's a misunderstanding to equate pampering with nurture and love. Doing so is so far from Dumbledore's thinking that I'm sure he feels he doesn't need to explain the difference -- leaving his readers just where Rowling wants them, ie thinking about it. > Jen: I'm assuming these comments are directed to the thread in general as they've not come up in our particular discusssion. My best guess for the 'pampered prince' comment comes from something JKR said about Dudley: > > "I feel sorry for Dudley. I might joke about him, but I feel truly > sorry for him because I see him as just as abused as Harry. Though, > in possibly a less obvious way. What they are doing to him is inept, > really. I think children recognize that. Poor Dudley. He's not being > prepared for the world at all, in any reasonable or compassionate > way, so I feel sorry for him." (Cinescape, Nov. 2000) > > So, whether people agree with JKR or not, Dumbledore seems to be > speaking for her convictions here. Carol: Exactly. Pampering is not love, or it's a perverted kind of love in which the parent gives the child what he wants rather than what he needs, which is firmness and rules as well as love, not yeilding to his every whim for fear of temper tantrums. We see Petunia early on allowing Baby!Dudley to kick her and scream at her because he wants sweets. A parent or guardian who's afraid of losing a child's love by saying "no" is not preparing the child for the world. (Note that the Hogwarts teachers in general don't pamper the students, which would be highly inadequate preparation for the WW. Umbridge, who comes close to coddling the "children" [at least those who don't thwart her] is far more dangerous than Lupin [as teacher, not werewolf] or Snape, who expose them to dangers they will face or might face as adults in the WW but under controlled conditions.) Jen: > Re: the prophecy, I wonder what DD would have done had there been no > eavesdropper? Even he was impressed with Trelawney's 'prediction'. Carol: Interesting question! I think he would have watched any wizards who might match the Prophecy closely, any non-Muggleborn male born at the end of July to parents who had defied Voldemort "thrice" or were in a position to do so, particularly boys born that particular July to Order members, which would have led him to focus on Harry and Neville. But with no eavesdropper, Voldemort would have no way of knowing about the Prophecy, so DD's best strategy would have been to watch and wait. Until Voldemort actually encountered one of the boys (most likely as an adult), he could hardly "mark him as his equal." And he couldn't seek out "the one with the power to destroy him" if he didn't know of that person's existence. And yet, until Voldemort created his own nemesis, he could not be defeated and the war against the WW would continue, with only the Order and the MoM to fight it. He would not have had young Severus Snape as his spy (unless Snape had some other reason to defect) and if Snape did apply for the DADA position, no reason not to hire him (especially given his presumably high OWL and NEWT marks in the subject and the chronic shortage of DADA teachers), so he'd have had no Potions Master Snape to work at his side for all those years because the DADA curse would have revealed young Snape as a (loyal) DE and sent him to Azkaban. Just some thoughts on might-have-beens. Fortunately for the WW, if not for the Potters, things didn't work out that way. The eavesdropping incident made possible Snape's defection and, more important, eleven years of peace for the WW, with Harry as "the one with the power to destroy the Dark Lord" somewhere along the road. Even Wormtail's betrayal had good consequences that were no part of his intention. Carol, wondering what the unintended consequences of Dumbledore's murder will be From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 20:01:26 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:01:26 -0000 Subject: Protego/McGonagall/Ships/Tobias/HarryRelatives/Kreachur/MaterialThings/DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164595 --- "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > > ... > > Carol wrote in > : > > << and [McGonagall] develops an equal fondness for > Harry, revealed by her buying him an expensive racing > broom and allowing him on the Quidditch team in his > first year when other first-years aren't even allowed > their own broom >> > > I agree that McGonagall is very fond of Harry, but I > don't think the Quidditch stuff is evidence of her > fondness for him. It can all be so well explained by > her fondness for Gryffindor winning Quidditch matches. > > ... bboyminn: Pure speculation but I don't think McGonagall actually bought Harry a broom. Nor do I think the charged Harry's own vault for it. I think it is much more likely that the school bought a broom for Harry to use. That is, not only was the broom paid for with school funds but was technically considered school property. I do think however that if Harry did well at Quidditch, when it came time to leave Hogwarts, they would have allowed him to keep the broom. Now there is nothing in canon to support this other than a logical analysis of what a school is likely to do. I simply don't see McGonagall taking the cost out of her personal fund. I question whether they can take money from Harry vault without some kind of, at least implied, authorization. I do see the school with substantial funds that the headmaster controls, and therefore assume the school paid for the broom. Technically the broom belongs to the school but has been given to Harry not only for his use, but has be placed in his keeping. Dumbledore and McGonagall being the old softies that they are, would certainly let Harry keep the broom after having successfully used it for 7 years. > Claudia wrote in > : > > << Why were DD, McGonagall, and LV still single after > all these yrs? ... >> > > The Dumbledore/McGonagall ship used to be very popular, > but I've *always* preferred the Dumbledore/Pomfrey and > McGonagall/Hooch ships. > > Dumbledore is 150 years old. That gives him enough > time to have outlived several wives. ... > bboyminn: Indeed you are just assuming that these people are and always have been single. I see no reason why McGonagall couldn't be married. She has dedicated her life to teaching, that's what she does. Any husband would have to understand that. Being Head of House, it seems reasonably important that she live at the school. However, there is nothing to say that she and her husband don't meet up for lunch or dinner on weekends and holidays, or that she doesn't spend all summer with her husband and potential family. Also note, that not all professors have a place at the Head Table. I assume the teacher who have a seat at the head table are the teachers who live at the school. I equally assume that those teacher who do not have a place at the table, do not live at the castle. They go home to their wives and children at night. So, because, she is Head of House, McGonagall's teaching contract includes room and board during the school year. I'm sure this is true of many boarding schools. There must be some teachers who are require either by the school or by their own life circumstances to live at the school. But that does not prevent them from having husbands, wives, and children. As to Dumbledore and Voldemort, among other things, I think their genius isolates them. In a sense, it is difficult to impossible for them to find an equal; some one who can relate to the world at the same level as they can. "It's lonely at the top." And this makes it difficult for them to find a romantic life partner that they can truly bond with and relate to. I think more than anything the isolation of genius has kept Dumbledore and Voldemort single. Though with Voldemort being a dillusional power-mad megalomanic hasn't helped I'm sure. I don't deny that Dumbledore might have had a wife at some time, but I'm sure she is long gone and her passing was a very painful experience for him. Consequently if Dumbledore was married at one time, I think it was the one and only time he was married. > > Steve bboyminn wrote in > : > > << H[arry] doesn't value material things because he > has seen the material things don't bring happiness. >> > > Harry *does* value (some) material things: the Nimbus > 2000 and the Firebolt spring to mind. Didn't he *cry* > over the Nimbus being destroyed? ... > bboyminn: No generalization is ever complete. I am not trying to define Harry in his totality, I am merely trying to highlight an aspect of Harry. Further, I am trying to contrast that aspect in Harry to that in Dudley. Dudley demands everything and values nothing. It is consumerism for the sake of consumerism. Dudley's goal is to receive and keep receiving, but that having, using, savoring, cherishing what he has means nothing. Harry on the other hand, while admittedly does value material things in a healthy way, he does so for their worth and true value. Not some false sense of how a person is defined by their possessions. Not in the sense that Draco is defined by his possessions as symbols of his wealth. Not is the sense that Dudley defines and values himself based on the material objects he is given, but having no sense of their value or meaning. Harry is not a consumer, he doesn't 'shop til he drops', though he certainly has the money to do so. He, in his own way, does value the few material possessions he has, but it seems a true sense of value rather than the false and empty values we see in Dudley and Draco. So, it is only true that Harry doesn't value material things, when that statement is taken in the context of how Harry's material values contrast with Dudleys. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sun Feb 4 20:21:29 2007 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Luckdragon) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:21:29 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164596 Luckdragon: I believe the "Deathly Hallows" are the remaining items in which Voldemort has created his Horcruxes. We all know book 7 will find Harry searching for and destroying the remaining Horcruxes. He must find the four items which belonged to the founders of Hogwarts ie) the Gryffindor sword, the Hufflepuff cup, The Slytherin necklace, and something from Ravenclaw(possibly a tiara or wand)before finally destroying Voldemort himself. These are all items which were/still are revered and can be considered hallowed. Any thoughts on this theory? From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Feb 4 20:58:21 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:58:21 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164597 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > I've been thinking since the title had been released what or where > the Deathly Hollows could be, as have we all. There have been many > great suggestions some of which have led me to my own far-fetched > thinking > My proposal therefore is: that the Deathly Hollows are good persons > who were killed by evil; empty (hollow) of life; like death (deathly) > but with ability beyond the boundaries of death because of the way in > which their life was taken...who will be a powerful force that will > protect Harry. Geoff: If I might add in my own twopennyworth, I think that I am inclined to take a diametrically opposite view to yours. If I might quote from a couple of posts I sent in the first threads on this topic, in post 163123, I wrote: "On the subject of "Hallow" the word can be a noun, a verb or an adjective. We can dispense with the adjective since that is usually only found as "hallowed" and as a verb, "hallows" only occurs as a third person singular whereas the structure of the book title really only supports its use as a noun. It is not a word which you would find thrown around idly in everyday conversation, except currently on HPFGU :-), but I would think that UK English speakers would only latch onto Hallowe'en or place names such as Allhallows-on-Sea if the matter was raised with them. As has been often pointed out, Hallowe'en is a contraction of All Hallow's Eve - the night before All Hallows Day, better known as All Saints Day. So usage might dictate that we are looking at deathly saints or a deathly place with connections to saints. So, will Harry be able to call on the help of now-deceased wizards, perhaps through portraits or information left by them or will things come to anend at a place of historical wizarding significance? It's a bit early to get too deeply into speculation; I think a number of people burnt their fingers over HBP this way but my gut feeling leans towards the latter scenario." and, later, in message 163332, I added: "I have said that I see the Deathly Hallows as being a place, although "Hallowe'en = All Hallows Eve = All Saints Eve" is the interpretation which has been bounced around, which leads me to the intriguing point that in the DVD of the "Prisoner of Azkaban", there is an interview involving Jo Rowling and Alfonso Cuar?n. In it, the latter remarks that he wanted the execution scene with Buckbeak to be in a graveyard but JKR vetoed this because, although there was a graveyard at Hogwarts, it was not in that location and she explained to Alfonso that it had a part to play later. Suspicious...." From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Feb 4 21:05:26 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 21:05:26 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Will Snape live or die and why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164598 Carol responds: > I'd say that about three-quarters of the DDM!Snapers agree with you > (and I know of at least one Snape-hater who's considering the > possibility). I see no evidence of any Snape/Lily relationship, only > an absence of evidence that he hates her, which can easily be > explained by her noninvolvement in the so-called Prank, which, > according to Dumbledore as well as Snape, could have resulted in > Teen!Severus's death. I think he genuinely tried to prevent her > death and Harry's because he was appalled by Voldemort's > interpretation of the Prophecy and James's death because he didn't > want James to die with the life debt unpaid... Jen: It's taken me a long time to warm up to the idea of a Snape-Lily connection, over three years to be precise & only with the addition of HBP . The idea of combining Snape's story with Lily's, when we already have Snape and James intertwined, sounds like overkill to me-- the Potters practically shaped his whole life? He had no other people who influenced him so much? And even knowing JKR can make me believe almost anything (the exception being the big thud of the prophecy), I'm expecting a huge suspension of disbelief if/when Harry learns about a Snape-Lily connection of any sort and *accepts* it. It's one thing to find out your hated rival also hates your Dad, it's another to find out he might have liked or loved your Mom. (Can't get past thinking about Snape mooning over Lily and having to *read* about it.) There are two things that give me hope we might not be heading in that direction: 1) Rowling's interview comment, when she was willing to speak about either the Lupin-Lily or Snape-Lily speculation and ended up answering only about Lupin in the end. Before anyone points out that she employed classic JKR diversion, I *know*. But a woman can grasp at straws, right? :) http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/#static:tlcinterviews/jkrhbp3 (scroll past midway) 2) Lily's story can influence Harry's perceptions about Snape regardless of whether there was any personal connection between them or not. The fact that Lily sees the world in a different way from James just means that Harry can be influenced by both parents in the way he views other people and the WW. But here is the main deterrent when I start leaning too far in the direction of there being no connection: Why did Dumbledore call Voldemort targeting the Potters Snape's 'greatest regret'? Dumbledore's defense only included the information that Snape didn't know 'which boy' or 'the parents he would destroy', not that Snape felt regret for Voldemort's decision to go on a murderous quest to kill an infant and his parents. So Voldemort's plan to murder a family was not Snape's greatest regret, his greatest regret was that it was this *particular* family. If it wasn't the murder aspect of the situation, and it wasn't the fact that an infant was involved, and Snape did hate the father involved but didn't want him dead because of a life debt, there are only two options left imo, given the story we have so far: either the Mom or the life debt were the reason for his regret. When I start down this road, parts of Neri's life debt theory look appealing. It would explain Dumbledore's comment from PS, 'Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt', among other things. I don't believe Snape is OFH as Neri's theory proposes, but do see how the life-debt could be a reasonable alternative to the Lily connection. Say targeting the Potters caused a chain reaction that led Snape back to Dumbledore, i.e., the realization that Voldemort was targeting James brought the life-debt into focus, which in turn caused Snape to analyze the reasons why he became a DE in the first place, and this finally led him to realize he couldn't be on Voldemort's side and would 'return' to Dumbledore. So his 'greatest regret' led eventually to the remorse rather than being a simultanous process. This process fits with how logical Snape is in canon and we don't have any rock-solid evidence for friendship or romantic interest motivating him (as of yet). Jen, wondering if someone has a quick link to Neri's theory they can send her off-list? From ida3 at planet.nl Sun Feb 4 20:04:35 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:04:35 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164599 Cassy V: > > and b) seems to have been > > (the only one?) to suspect Sirius * before* the events at Godric's > > Hollow? 'You'd have died like your father, too arrogant to > > believe you might be mistaken in Black ?' (POA19). Now what was > > *that* about? > > zgirnius: > Personally, I think Snape may have warned James personally, or > through Potter, that Voldemort had subverted his Secret Keeper. > Peter was, apparently, the SK for a week, so Voldemort did not act > immediately, which leaves more time for leaks (hypothetically) to > have happened. I don't think Snape had specific information about > Sirius: I think it was more that he knew 1) the Fidelius had been > cast, and 2) Voldemort was convinced he could find the Potters, and > deduced 3) Sirius was a traitor, because the whole point of the > switch was to tell everyone Sirius was the SK. > Dana: 'You'd have died like your father, too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black ?' (POA19). Personally I have always thought this to be about "the prank". Snape was (and still at this time) convinced that Sirius set him up to die. I think James always maintained that it was never Sirius intention to cause Snape's death. And this reads to me that if James than had believed Sirius capable of murder like Snape had always proclaimed than he himself would not have died by trusting Sirius with his life. I do not for one moment believe that Snape warned James personally. I think the hospital scene where Snape reminds DD that Sirius was capable of murder at age 16 to be underlining the belief Snape holds that James would had been alive if he'd not put all his trust in Sirius in the first place. Personally I also can't see the whole Lily/ Snape thing going either. I personally feel and of course this is my opinion and can be proven wrong in the next book that the reason he never mentions Lily is because she is not worth mentioning to him. I personally think book 6 is proof of this that he indeed holds the pure blood ideology and why he chooses to idolize is mothers side of his being an attempt to deny his fathers heritage. Lilly is muggleborn and therefore I believe she has no meaning to him at all. The Lily/Snape essence has been non- existent from book 1 through 6 with only one interaction between the two and it read for me that he would have preferred her staying out of it (attacked by the most popular lot in school and than being rescued by the "mudblood"). I also do not believe that Lily came to his aid out of affection for Snape but I believe she was probably a prefect at the time and I read the Ron/ Twin/ Hermione interaction where Ron like Lupin chooses not to interfere while Hermione feels it's her duty to confront the Twins (Lily feeling obligated to confront James/ Sirius) as being somewhat the same thing we see in the pensieve scene interaction. JMHO Dana From loves_the_lit at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 20:09:12 2007 From: loves_the_lit at yahoo.com (loves_the_lit) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:09:12 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164600 Carol wrote: > But what *is* evil in JKR's view? Is it a negative, the > absence of good (as cold is the absence of heat and darkness is the > absence of light)? Or is it an essence in itself? > > In SS/PS, Quirrell quotes Voldemort as saying, "There is no such > thing as good and evil, only power and those too weak to use it." > > What *is* evil in the HP books? Nancy: JKR does have a lot of questions to answer. But I feel that yours are ones that we'll be thinking and debating about for a long time. Certainly at least part of her view of evil is the very fact of believing that there is no such thing as evil, only power. That is suggestive of the true sociopathic personallity-someone who is incapable of understanding that other people actually exist. In the sociopath's view, other people are merely instruments to meet one's own needs. Other people are there to be used, or to make suffer, or to kill without remorse because the sociopath is totally lacking empathy for anyone else. Voldemort has no friends; he has no need for friends. In his mind, other people are little different from the inferi-just a bit trickier to manipulate. Carol: SNIP The reversal of "lives" and "survives" does make a big difference. (I'll have to run to the bookshelf in the future.) But personally, I'll want to vomit if LV doesn't die in the end. They say everyone is capable of change and personal growth. But that would be too much for me to accept. You are right. LV has already sacrificed his humanity. can't see him changing enough to get even a part of it back. Maybe that's the true nature of evil, that one has lost one's humanity to the xtent that there's no coming back? Nancy-aka "loves_the_lit" From cynthiaannm at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 20:34:28 2007 From: cynthiaannm at yahoo.com (cynthiaannm) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:34:28 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164601 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Luckdragon" wrote: > > Luckdragon: > I believe the "Deathly Hallows" are the remaining items in which > Voldemort has created his Horcruxes. We all know book 7 will find > Harry searching for and destroying the remaining Horcruxes. He must > find the four items which belonged to the founders of Hogwarts ie >) the Gryffindor sword, the Hufflepuff cup, The Slytherin necklace, > and something from Ravenclaw(possibly a tiara or wand)before finally > destroying Voldemort himself. These are all items which were/still > are revered and can be considered hallowed. Any thoughts on this > theory? I'll have to agree. Just look hallow up in thesaurus.com. I am just not sure what from Ravenclaw could be a Horcrux. Her wand could be. Speaking of wands, anyone have any theories about Ollivander, the wandmaker? Do you think he is evil? cynthiaannm From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sun Feb 4 21:23:29 2007 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Luckdragon) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 21:23:29 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164602 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cynthiaannm" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Luckdragon" > wrote: > > > > Luckdragon: > > I believe the "Deathly Hallows" are the remaining items in which > > Voldemort has created his Horcruxes. We all know book 7 will find > > Harry searching for and destroying the remaining Horcruxes. He must > > find the four items which belonged to the founders of Hogwarts ie > >) the Gryffindor sword, the Hufflepuff cup, The Slytherin necklace, > > and something from Ravenclaw(possibly a tiara or wand)before finally > > destroying Voldemort himself. These are all items which were/still > > are revered and can be considered hallowed. Any thoughts on this > > theory? > > > I'll have to agree. Just look hallow up in thesaurus.com. I am just > not sure what from Ravenclaw could be a Horcrux. Her wand could be. > Speaking of wands, anyone have any theories about Ollivander, the wandmaker? Do you think he is evil? > > cynthiaannm Luckdragon: I do not think Ollivander is evil. I think he has been taken or is in hiding from LV because he is either in posession of the Ravenclaw item which LV seeks, knows where it is, or could be helpful to LV by creating a new, more powerful wand for LV. > From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Feb 4 21:24:05 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 21:24:05 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164603 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: loves_the_lit: > JKR believes there is such as > thing as evil. And evil has to be fought. I don't think she believes > that all the love and magic in the world could have saved Hitler. He > just had to be stopped. That's why the prophecy states that for Harry > and Voldemort, in the end, neither can survive while the other one lives. Carol: > You raise an interesting point regarding the nature of evil in the HP > books: "JKR believes there is such a thing as evil. And evil has to be > fought." But what *is* evil in JKR's view? Is it a negative, the > absence of good (as cold is the absence of heat and darkness is the > absence of light)? Or is it an essence in itself? Geoff: If JKR is looking at it from a Christian point of view, I suspect that she will see evil as an essence in itself. Satan is seen as a person. Christians believe that he was Lucifer, one of the greatest of the angels, who, through overweening pride, sought to grasp power for himself and was ejected from heaven. Jesus acknowledged this: "He (Jesus) said, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven" (Luke 10:18 New International Version). We believe that he is a person dedicated to destroying all that is good and creating distrust and chaos in the world. Tolkien echoed this in the "Silmarillion" when Melkor rebelled against Il?vatar and was exiled to Middle-Earth with all who followed him and later became Morgoth. Sauron continued after Morgoth's exile to make every effort to underine any good which was being done by the wizards, such as Gandalf, attempting to pervert both people and actions to his own evil ends. C.S.Lewis also echoed the same theme. The White Witch is seen in "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" as evil through and through wanting only power and seeking the destruction of any opposition. She is shown in all her awfulness when we first see her first contact with Narnia in "The Magician's Nephew". As a Christian, I believe in a sentient spirit of evil not just in a lack of things such as goodness or light. I see Voldemort as being one manifestation of the embodiment of pure evil. From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sun Feb 4 21:35:03 2007 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Luckdragon) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 21:35:03 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164604 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > > > I've been thinking since the title had been released what or where > > the Deathly Hollows could be, as have we all. There have been many > > great suggestions some of which have led me to my own far-fetched > > thinking > > > > > My proposal therefore is: that the Deathly Hollows are good persons > > who were killed by evil; empty (hollow) of life; like death (deathly) > > but with ability beyond the boundaries of death because of the way in > > which their life was taken...who will be a powerful force that will > > protect Harry. > > Geoff: > If I might add in my own twopennyworth, I think that I am inclined to > take a diametrically opposite view to yours. If I might quote from a > couple of posts I sent in the first threads on this topic, in post > 163123, I wrote: > > "On the subject of "Hallow" the word can be a noun, a verb or an > adjective. > > We can dispense with the adjective since that is usually only found > as "hallowed" and as a verb, "hallows" only occurs as a third person > singular whereas the structure of the book title really only supports > its use as a noun. > > It is not a word which you would find thrown around idly in everyday > conversation, except currently on HPFGU :-), but I would think that > UK English speakers would only latch onto Hallowe'en or place names > such as Allhallows-on-Sea if the matter was raised with them. > > As has been often pointed out, Hallowe'en is a contraction of All > Hallow's Eve - the night before All Hallows Day, better known as > All Saints Day. > > So usage might dictate that we are looking at deathly saints or a > deathly place with connections to saints. So, will Harry be able to > call on the help of now-deceased wizards, perhaps through portraits > or information left by them or will things come to anend at a place > of historical wizarding significance? > > It's a bit early to get too deeply into speculation; I think a number > of people burnt their fingers over HBP this way but my gut feeling > leans towards the latter scenario." > > and, later, in message 163332, I added: > > "I have said that I see the Deathly Hallows as being a place, although > "Hallowe'en = All Hallows Eve = All Saints Eve" is the interpretation > which has been bounced around, which leads me to the intriguing > point that in the DVD of the "Prisoner of Azkaban", there is an interview > involving Jo Rowling and Alfonso Cuar?n. In it, the latter remarks that > he wanted the execution scene with Buckbeak to be in a graveyard but > JKR vetoed this because, although there was a graveyard at Hogwarts, > it was not in that location and she explained to Alfonso that it had a > part to play later. > > Suspicious...." Luckdragon: I thought of the cemetary as well, at first, but I decided she was referring to the upcoming graveyard scene in Goblet of Fire when she asked Cuaron not to use a graveyard in Prisoner of Azkaban. Next I thought of Saints or perhaps the previous(now dead) headmasters as "Deathly Hallows", and while I'm sure at least one or more of the past headmasters/portraits will play a role in helping Harry, I feel that Rowling has so much unfinished business to tie up in book seven that introducing Saints, or having Harry involved in with several or all past headmasters might be too much as well as tackling the huge task of finding/destroying the Horcruxes. > From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 21:40:20 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 21:40:20 -0000 Subject: Protego/McGonagall/Ships/Tobias/HarryRelatives/Kreachur/MaterialThings/DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164605 Carol earlier: > > << and [McGonagall] develops an equal fondness for Harry, revealed by her buying him an expensive racing broom and allowing him on the Quidditch team in his first year when other first-years aren't even allowed their own broom >> > > catlady reponded: > > I agree that McGonagall is very fond of Harry, but I don't think the Quidditch stuff is evidence of her fondness for him. It can all be so well explained by her fondness for Gryffindor winning Quidditch matches. > bboyminn added: > > Pure speculation but I don't think McGonagall actually bought Harry a broom. Nor do I think the charged Harry's own vault for it. I think it is much more likely that the school bought a broom for Harry to use. That is, not only was the broom paid for with school funds but was technically considered school property. I do think however that if Harry did well at Quidditch, when it came time to leave Hogwarts, they would have allowed him to keep the broom. > Technically the broom belongs to the school but has been given to Harry not only for his use, but has be placed in his keeping. Dumbledore and McGonagall being the old softies that they are, would certainly let Harry keep the broom after having successfully used it for 7 years. Carol again: Regardless of whether she's favoring Harry specifically or Gryffindor in general (she certainly wants very much to have the Quidditch Cup transferred from Snape's office to hers), McGonagall is bending or even breaking the rules to get herself a Seeker, as she herself admits. First years are not allowed to have brooms, as we're informed in the supply list enclosed with Harry's Hogwarts letter (since the letter is signed by McGonagall, it's likely that she also wrote the list and certainly she enclosed it in the letter). The list states in all-capital letters: "PARENTS ARE REMINDED THAT FIRST YEARS ARE NOT ALLOWED THEIR OWN BROOMSTICKS" (SS Am. ed. 66). That being the case, it's no surprise that Harry is the youngest Quidditch player in a century. Probably they're not allowed to try out for Quidditch for the same reason they're not allowed to have brooms (it's too dangerous), or surely Draco and Ron would have done so (and Draco, at least, might have made the team, at least as an alternate). Instead, even those first-years who can already fly are required to take flying lessons on rickety school brooms, and we never hear of a first-year other than Harry either being on the team or being allowed a broom. Harry, like Draco, has disobeyed Madam Hooch's specific order not to fly while she's taking the injured Neville to the hospital wing: "None of you is to move while I take this boy to the hospital wing. You leave those brooms where they are or you'll be out of Hogwarts before you can say 'Quidditch'" (147). As it happens, neither Draco nor Harry is thrown out of Hogwarts, and Harry is not only unpunished but greatly rewarded for disobeying her. True, Harry's motive for disobedience is better than Draco's, but is going after Neville's Remembrall (and threatening to knock Draco off his broom if he doesn't give it back, p.149) sufficient reason to disobey a teacher? Madam Hooch could easily have retrieved the Remembrall herself after class. There's no need for Harry to do it except to get back at Draco. It seems to me that Harry, who has never flown before, is taking an unjustifiable risk worthy of MWPP (who broke more than a few rules themselves). Even McGonagall says, "How *dare* you? [You] might have broken your neck!" (149), and Harry expects McGonagall to expel him ("Now he'd done it. He hadn't lasted two weeks," 150) or beat him ("Was Wood a cane she was going to use on him?" 150) for his reckless disregard of Madam Hooch's warning. Instead, McGonagall makes Harry the Gryffindor Seeker. I'm sorry, but this action looks like hypocrisy and favoritism to me, not to mention undermining another teacher's authority. And she herself says, "I shall speak to Professor Dumbledore and see if we can't *bend the first-year rule*" (152). Ordinarily, McGonagall enforces the rules regardless of the reason they are broken or the House of the student breaking them. She later gives Draco detention along with HRH for being out of bed despite believing that they've tried to trick him with "a cock and bull story about a dragon." Even the innocent Neville gets detention (and fifty points from Gryffindor) because "*nothing* gives you the right to walk around school at night, especially these days. It's very dangerous" (243). Of course, flying on a broom when you've never done so before despite a teacher's direct order is also very dangerous, and allowing first-years to have brooms is against the rule she emphatically states herself in the supply list enclosed with the Hogwarts letter, but, oh, well. The Quidditch Cup is at stake. As for the broom itself, Wood says, "We'll have to get him a decent broom, Professor, a Nimbus Two Thousand or a Cleansweep Seven" (152), but it's unlikely that Wood, a student, pays for the broom, and a Nimbus 2000 is not just a "decent" broom, it's a state-of-the art racing broom (Firebolts and Nimbus 2001s having not yet been invented). Harry overhears another boy in Diagon Alley referring to it as the "fastest ever" (72). Ron taunts Draco after harry receives the broom, saying, "It's not any old broomstick. It's a Nimbus Two Thousand," and Draco retorts, "What would you know about it, Weasley? You can't afford half the handle" (165). And this expensive racing broom, the best available at the time, is clearly given to Harry by McGonnagall herself, not for his use while he's on the team but as his own to keep: "DO NOT OPEN THIS PARCEL AT THE TABLE," reads the note. "It contains *your* new Nimbus Two Thousand, but I don't want everyone knowing you've got a broomstick, or they'll all want one. Professor M. McGonnagall" (164) Not a word about the broom being for Harry's use at Hogwarts, to be returned when the seven years are completed. (And note that Harry takes it home during the summer; he doesn't leave it at school.) So whether she bought the broom with her own money or with school funds, she's responsible for giving Harry the most expensive broom available at the time--a gift to a first-year student in her own house that she doesn't want anyone else to know about so that her team can have a gifted Seeker and win the Quidditch cup. Carol, conceding that her rule-bending favors Gryffindor in general rather than reflecting the fondness for Harry she later develops but nevertheless considering it favoritism rivaling if not exceeding any favoritism that Snape shows for the Slytherins From cynthiaannm at yahoo.com Sun Feb 4 21:33:24 2007 From: cynthiaannm at yahoo.com (cynthiaannm) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 21:33:24 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164606 Luckdragon: > I do not think Ollivander is evil. I think he has been taken or is in > hiding from LV because he is either in posession of the Ravenclaw > item which LV seeks, knows where it is, or could be helpful to LV by > creating a new, more powerful wand for LV. cynthiaannm: Hmm.. I never thought of that, actually. I never have thought Ollivander was evil, I've always wondered what happened to him and his store, though. I have heard from other people that we could be evil. Oh! I bet he is in hiding because he really does have Ravenclaws wand. That would make sense. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Feb 4 23:10:29 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 23:10:29 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164607 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Luckdragon" wrote: Geoff: > > and, later, in message 163332, I added: > > > > "I have said that I see the Deathly Hallows as being a place, although > > "Hallowe'en = All Hallows Eve = All Saints Eve" is the interpretation > > which has been bounced around, which leads me to the intriguing > > point that in the DVD of the "Prisoner of Azkaban", there is an > > interview involving Jo Rowling and Alfonso Cuar?n. In it, the latter remarks > > that he wanted the execution scene with Buckbeak to be in a graveyard but > > JKR vetoed this because, although there was a graveyard at Hogwarts, > > it was not in that location and she explained to Alfonso that it had a > > part to play later. > > > > Suspicious...." > Luckdragon: > I thought of the cemetary as well, at first, but I decided she was > referring to the upcoming graveyard scene in Goblet of Fire when she > asked Cuaron not to use a graveyard in Prisoner of Azkaban. Geoff: That isn't likely though, is it, because the graveyard scene in Goblet of Fire is at Little Hangleton, where the Riddle family lived and nowhere near Hogwarts?.... From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sun Feb 4 23:37:30 2007 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Luckdragon) Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 23:37:30 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164608 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Luckdragon" wrote: > > Geoff: > > > > and, later, in message 163332, I added: > > > > > > "I have said that I see the Deathly Hallows as being a place, although > > > "Hallowe'en = All Hallows Eve = All Saints Eve" is the interpretation > > > which has been bounced around, which leads me to the intriguing > > > point that in the DVD of the "Prisoner of Azkaban", there is an > > > interview involving Jo Rowling and Alfonso Cuar?n. In it, the latter remarks > > > that he wanted the execution scene with Buckbeak to be in a graveyard but > > > JKR vetoed this because, although there was a graveyard at Hogwarts, > > > it was not in that location and she explained to Alfonso that it had a > > > part to play later. > > > > > > Suspicious...." > > > Luckdragon: > > I thought of the cemetary as well, at first, but I decided she was > > referring to the upcoming graveyard scene in Goblet of Fire when she > > asked Cuaron not to use a graveyard in Prisoner of Azkaban. > > Geoff: > That isn't likely though, is it, because the graveyard scene in Goblet > of Fire is at Little Hangleton, where the Riddle family lived and nowhere > near Hogwarts?.... Luckdragon: True enough; if in fact she was referring to the location of the Graveyard specifically and not just the fact that she did not want a cemetary scene in POA as it was to be a big event in GOF. However; I do think there may be a graveyard scene in "Deathly Hallows" at Hogwarts if Harry is to see where DD or the other headmasters, possibly even his parents may be buried. Luckdragon: who is enjoying these discussions and getting very excited at the thought that we will soon have all our answers. > From inkling_rg at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 01:42:16 2007 From: inkling_rg at yahoo.com (inkling_rg) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 01:42:16 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Will Snape live or die and why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164609 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: >[snip] I'd say that about three-quarters of the DDM!Snapers agree with you > (and I know of at least one Snape-hater who's considering the > possibility). I see no evidence of any Snape/Lily relationship, only > an absence of evidence that he hates her, [snip long discussion of canon evidence for Snape/Lily.] You lay out a good interpretation of the events, Carol. And I'll admit, as one of those three quarter DDM!Snapers, I don't see a smoking gun for Snape/Lily anywhere in the text. No. It's what JKR has said (or not said) *outside* the text that convinced me of LOLLIPOPS. This is a theory that's been kicking around the fandom since *forever* (it was practically the first theory I encountered when I joined Potter fandom, in the pre-GoF days of Spring 2000--to give a sense of perspective, this was back in the days of "Lily Riddle was a Slytherin and Voldemort was her dad and Harry is Hermione's brother" theories.) And yet, JKR has *never* taken the time to dismiss Snape-loved-Lily-- even though you'd think she would, if only out of pity for the message boards that are doomed to get at least one "i'm new and i think Snape loved Lilly what do u think?" posts a day until she does. But no, she's never taken aim at this lumbering, melodramatic dinosaur of a theory, even as the corpses of younger, seemingly fitter theories piled on the ground around it (let's all share a moment of silence for Florence and Vampire! Snape.) Instead, the two times she has been asked *point blank* whether there was some kind romantic connection between Snape and Lily, in the Jeremy Paxman interview pre-OotP and in the mugglenet interview after HBP, she has been evasive and open-ended. If I may quote liberally: >>>[Paxman Interview] JP: Are we going to discover anything more about Snape? JKR: Yes. JP: And Harry's mother? Did he have a crush on Harry's mother or unrequited love or anything like that? JKR: Hence his animosity to Harry? JP: Yes. JKR: You speculate? JP: I speculate, yes, I'm just asking whether you can tell us. JKR: No I can't tell you. >>> And this longer, more curious one with mugglenet (it does strike me as odd that she offers to "answer either one", and then suddenly changes that to "I can't answer, can I, really?" I almost wonder if she mispoke or was misheard the first time. In the end though, she elaborates on Lupin and Lily's relationship and stealthily avoids saying anything at all about Snape and Lily, and the interviewers don't press her on it. Silly ducks.) >>>ES: Was James the only one who had romantic feelings for Lily? JKR: No. [Pause.] She was like Ginny, she was a popular girl. MA: Snape? JKR: That is a theory that's been put to me repeatedly. ES: What about Lupin? JKR: I can answer either one. ES: How about both? One at a time. JKR: I can't answer, can I, really? ES: Can you give us any clue, without misleading us [Emerson misspoke; he meant "without giving too much away"] --? JKR: I've never, to my knowledge, lied when posed a question about the books. To my knowledge. You can imagine, I've now been asked hundreds of questions; it's perfectly possible at some point I misspoke or I gave a misleading answer unintentionally, or I may have answered truthfully at the time and then changed my mind in a subsequent book. That makes me cagey about answering some questions in too much detail because I have to have some leeway to get there and do it my way, but never on a major plot point. Lupin was very fond of Lily, we'll put it like that, but I wouldn't want anyone to run around thinking that he competed with James for her. She was a popular girl, and that is relevant. But I think you've seen that already. She was a bit of a catch.>>> The final answer in both interviews? Not a sensible and long overdue "What? Snape/Lily? Oh, heavens, *no*" but a very evasive, very significant "I can't tell you." I can't see how you can read that as anything other than Rowlingese for, "yes there's something there, but if I come right out and say it, that'll spoil the surprise, won't it?" Whether you think it's icky or cliche or what, "Snape loved Lily" looks like a survivor. And as someone who's had a schmaltzy little soft-spot for it ever since I first read the theory way back in 2000, I'm delighted. -Inkling From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 02:08:20 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 02:08:20 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: <001001c7485c$93a16ed0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164610 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ronin_47" wrote: > > Mainly, I think that just because someone's role in life changes doesn't mean they have to die. As one chapter of life ends, a new one begins. Someone like Snape could easily find a new niche and may be quite relieved that he can now pursue something more peaceful. Maybe he will finally take up the roll of DADA teacher at Hogwarts. (If the curse is lifted from the position) or maybe he will become the new Headmaster. Lupinlore now: OH MY GOODNESS! If JKR did that I'd say she is a contemptible idiot who favors and defends the abuse of children and deserves only to be derided and reviled. But fortunately I doubt she will do any such thing. As many have said, a resolved Snape (however he is resolved) is a Snape without a place in the world. His entire character is oriented to the past. One only has to look at the various theories that animate fandom. Snape loved Lily. Snape hated Lily. Snape loved Narcissa. Snape was genuine in his remorse. Snape was not genuine in his remorse. Snape new what he was doing in taking the UV. Snape didn't know what he was doing in taking the UV. All oriented to the past, and all to become pointless once the answers are revealed. Ickle Sevviekins, the vessel and carrier of such theories, would be pointless as well. What would be his purpose? What would be the purpose in the narrative of keeping him alive, other than to prove that JKR favors the abuse of children? Nothing. Therefore, I'd say he's pretty much done for. Lupinlore, counting the days until the idiotic and reprehensible child abuser gets his due reward, or until JKR reveals her support for child abuse From bawilson at citynet.net Sun Feb 4 22:14:39 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 17:14:39 -0500 Subject: Hallows Re: The Deathly Hollows Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164611 A Hallow can also be a sacred place, such as a shrine or temple, or the place where a spiritually-significant event took place. Bruce Alan Wilson "The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From puduhepa98 at aol.com Mon Feb 5 03:22:13 2007 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 22:22:13 EST Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1- Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164612 > Cassy: POA: Well, the result of Snape *totally* losing it in the Shrieking Shack (Lily-died-despite-(Lily-died-despite-my-w(Lily-died-d(Lily-died- that the real culprit, Wormtail, escaped... to rejoin Voldemort. Sirius Black is (still) the Most Wanted, Remus Lupin is a disgraced werewolf and Fudge thinks that Dumbledore employs deranged staff. Nice one, Severus... still it's good to know you're (supposed to be) on our side! Nikkalmati This statement really has me puzzled. Lupin and Sirius are about to tell their story, Snape comes in and some things about their past and his character are revealed, Snape is knocked out, the Marauders continue their story, convince the Trio, and all leave the Shack. Snape's arrival interrupts the flow of the story, but nothing happened in the Shack or afterwards that would not have happened, if Snape had not come out after Lupin, except that Snape rescues unconscious Harry, Sirius and Hermione. Nikkalmati >wynnleaf >I read a lot of Cassy's website and notice that she believes Snape will die and Harry will forgive Snape as he dies. I disagree with this because I believe that JKR has set Harry up to do 3 things in regards to Snape. 1. JKR has made a big point of Harry's hatred of Snape growing more and more personal. Therefore, Harry must overcome his hatred of Snape. And JKR won't let him destroy Voldemort with his power the dark lord knows not of -- love -- until he overcomes that hatred. 2. JKR has had Harry think that he will "never" forgive Snape. Therefore Harry will forgive Snape. 3. JKR has had Harry time and again reject Dumbledore's trust in Snape. Therefore Harry, as DDM!Harry, will come to trust DDM!Snape. >Harry can forgive Snape in a dying!Snape scene. But it takes time to build trust. So I think that Harry will have some time over the course of DH to overcome his hatred, forgive Snape, *and* learn to trust him. So no forgiveness while Snape is dying -- it's too quick. But that doesn't mean Snape will live. I am very curious as to what those of you who agree with DDM!Snape think. Will Snape live or die and why? Nikkalmati My vote and my hope is that Snape will live. I agree with wynnleaf's points above about how JKR is building up to a reversal of Harry's opinion of Snape. It isn't necessary for Snape to die in some dramatic sacrificial gesture to convince Harry he is DDM. In fact, what Harry needs to see is the past revealed to understand Snape's role. If Snape dies sacrificing his life to defeat LV, he becomes the primary figure and the focus of the reader will be taken away from Harry, the hero. (If Snape is some flavor of evil, the same result will be achieved by having Harry magnanimously refusing to kill him in the end a la Wormtail). I don't think it matters whether Snape has a future in the WW for purpose of deciding whether his death is necessary for the plot of DH. I believe Snape may be the character whose fate was changed in Book 7 and he will be allowed to live on. I suspect his unexpected popularity with fans and the fact that he is " a gift of a character" may have weighted in his favor. Personally, I hope he becomes Headmaster of Hogwarts. :>) He won't have to teach in that position anyway. Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 03:32:55 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 03:32:55 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1- In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164613 Nikkalmati: > I don't think it matters whether Snape has a future in the WW for purpose of > deciding whether his death is necessary for the plot of DH. I believe Snape > may be the character whose fate was changed in Book 7 and he will be allowed > to live on. I suspect his unexpected popularity with fans and the fact > that he is " a gift of a character" may have weighted in his favor. Personally, > I hope he becomes Headmaster of Hogwarts. :>) > He won't have to teach in that position anyway. Alla: Actually, even though I do hope that LL is right in a sense that Snape's character is past oriented, I think that you can be right in a sense that Snape is the character who got the reprieve, because of his popularity with the fans. So, hope as I am that Snape is dead or live forever in Azkaban at the end of book 7, I think it is possible that he will survive and do something at the end, if he is DD!M. But I am keeping my fingers crossed that JKR will not make him a Headmaster. To subject next generations of Gryffindors to this bastard, sigh, I hope JKR will not do that. Sorry. I am hoping that JKR will not go for symbolism of the murderer of the most beloved Headmaster succeeding him. JMO, Alla, who will have a box of tissues as well on July 21, but who will consider those tissues too precious to spend one of them on Snape. :) From irenetsui at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 03:27:24 2007 From: irenetsui at yahoo.com (irenetsui) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 03:27:24 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar and Quirrell-mort Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164614 I had been thinking about this for many days now and I wonder if this question has been brought up before... During Harry's first year at Hogwarts, when Voldemort was sharing Quirrell's body, hiding at the back of his head under the turban, how come we did not hear about Harry's scar hurting in DADA classes? We know his scar hurt at the Welcoming Feast when Quirrell had his head facing Harry. I am sure Quirrell would have turned his back to the students at least once in a while? Thanks! Irene From bawilson at citynet.net Mon Feb 5 03:45:38 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 22:45:38 -0500 Subject: Dueling vs. Fighting Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164615 There were some comments on how Prof. Flitwick was overcome so easily when supposedly he was a dueling champion. Leaving aside the question of was he really or not (it is not presented in canon as a fact, but as a rumor among the students; I'm sure that I am not the only person who remembers some colorful rumors about our teachers' pasts), dueling is not the same thing as fighting. In school I was a wrestler; I once placed fifth in my state. In college I fenced; I wasn't all that good, but I held my own. As an adult, I studied Kempo and advanced to the rank of Brown Belt. I have known people in all three disciplines who were hell-on-wheels in the controlled, ritualized circumstances of competition, but who couldn't fight themselves out of a paper bag in a real-world situation. There is not reason to think that the same distinction might not hold in magical combat. Bruce Alan Wilson "The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Feb 5 04:23:34 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 23:23:34 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Will Snape live or die and why? References: Message-ID: <007201c748dd$6731d5c0$e4b4400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164616 > Jen: > But here is the main deterrent when I start leaning too far in the > direction of there being no connection: Why did Dumbledore call > Voldemort targeting the Potters Snape's 'greatest regret'? > Dumbledore's defense only included the information that Snape didn't > know 'which boy' or 'the parents he would destroy', not that Snape > felt regret for Voldemort's decision to go on a murderous quest to > kill an infant and his parents. So Voldemort's plan to murder a > family was not Snape's greatest regret, his greatest regret was that > it was this *particular* family. If it wasn't the murder aspect of > the situation, and it wasn't the fact that an infant was involved, > and Snape did hate the father involved but didn't want him dead > because of a life debt, there are only two options left imo, given > the story we have so far: either the Mom or the life debt were the > reason for his regret. > > When I start down this road, parts of Neri's life debt theory look > appealing. It would explain Dumbledore's comment from PS, 'Professor > Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt', among other > things. Magpie: I definitely have started leaning towards some sort of Snape/Lily thing since HBP, and recently I was re-reading PS and noticed something. Dumbledore explains the Life Debt by saying that that was the reason Snape worked so hard to protect Harry that year--because he thought that would pay the Life Debt and they would be even and Snape could go back to hating James in peace. What struck me is that reading it knowing what I know now it suddenly seemed like a separate issue from the Prophecy. Like, that Snape feels a specific thing with Harry, whom he hates because of James, that's also connected to the Life Debt (which Dumbledore doesn't describe as deep magic, but more just the way Snape feels to have had his life saved by a guy he hated). But it made me feel even more like his greatest regret was different. He was undoing that by trying to bring down Voldemort and be a spy. Obviously this doesn't give any evidence for or against whatever Snape might or might not have felt about Lily Evans, but it just struck me that way reading PS again that suddenly the Life Debt and saving Harry's life seemed like a smaller, side issue for Snape besides the greater regret/switching sides/spying/bringing down Voldemort. -m From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Mon Feb 5 05:37:52 2007 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 21:37:52 -0800 Subject: "Flying" Hagrid and "Home Stretch" reread In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <519924837.20070204213752@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164617 This past week, I figured out that there are just a few more number of days separating now and the release of DH than the sum total number of chapters in Books 1-6. So as we go into the "Home Stretch" before the release of the series conclusion, I am re-reading/listening to the entire series, one chapter per day, in order to lead directly into reading DH. In my reading I'm also looking for clues, unanswered questions, etc., and I invite anyone else to do the same. Today is Day 5 in my reread, and in PS/SS Ch. 5, "Diagon Alley", I found something odd -- As they leave for London, Hagrid explains to Harry that he "flew" to the Rock. But how?? There's no sign of Buckbeak, and I'm sure somewhere Hagrid says he's too big to mount a broom. So what does he mean?? Is it possible that there's a Thestral there that Harry of course doesn't see? Or did Hagrid simply apparate to the Rock (since he seems to disapparate at the end of the chapter)? Any thoughts? Dave From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Mon Feb 5 05:45:41 2007 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 05:45:41 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Will Snape live or die and why? In-Reply-To: <007201c748dd$6731d5c0$e4b4400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164618 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > Magpie: > I definitely have started leaning towards some sort of Snape/Lily thing > since HBP, and recently I was re-reading PS and noticed something. > Dumbledore explains the Life Debt by saying that that was the reason Snape > worked so hard to protect Harry that year--because he thought that would pay > the Life Debt and they would be even and Snape could go back to hating James > in peace. > > What struck me is that reading it knowing what I know now it suddenly seemed > like a separate issue from the Prophecy. Like, that Snape feels a specific > thing with Harry, whom he hates because of James, that's also connected to > the Life Debt (which Dumbledore doesn't describe as deep magic, but more > just the way Snape feels to have had his life saved by a guy he hated). But > it made me feel even more like his greatest regret was different. He was > undoing that by trying to bring down Voldemort and be a spy. > > Obviously this doesn't give any evidence for or against whatever Snape might > or might not have felt about Lily Evans, but it just struck me that way > reading PS again that suddenly the Life Debt and saving Harry's life seemed > like a smaller, side issue for Snape besides the greater regret/switching > sides/spying/bringing down Voldemort. Quick_Silver: While I generally lean towards Snape/Lily as an explanation of Snape's remorse, etc. I would argue that the life debt is an inherent part of Snape's greater regret/switching sides/spying/bringing down Voldemort because it reveals his character. To me the fact that Snape can acknowledge/understand what he owes James (i.e. the life debt) speaks to some sense of underlying morality and concept of honor/ethics. This is in contrast to Peter Pettigrew who apparently disregards his life debt to Harry and is thus shown as having apparently no underlying sense of morality. Quick_Silver From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 08:06:52 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 08:06:52 -0000 Subject: "Flying" Hagrid and "Home Stretch" reread In-Reply-To: <519924837.20070204213752@mindspring.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164619 --- Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > > ... I am re-reading/listening to the > entire series, one chapter per day, .... > > Today is Day 5 in my reread, and in PS/SS Ch. 5, > "Diagon Alley", I found something odd -- As they leave > for London, Hagrid explains to Harry that he "flew" to > the Rock. But how?? There's no sign of Buckbeak, and > I'm sure somewhere Hagrid says he's too big to mount a > broom. So what does he mean?? Is it possible that > there's a Thestral there that Harry of course doesn't > see? Or did Hagrid simply apparate to the Rock (since > he seems to disapparate at the end of the chapter)? > > Any thoughts? > > > Dave > bboyminn: Note that there are other occassions when Hagrid travels by magic. For example, after Hagrid gave Harry his ticket to return to the Dursleys, Harry peeks out the train window, blinks, and Hagrid is gone. Where did he go in the blink of an eye? The only reasonable explanations are he either apparated or took a Portkey. We see that Portkeys are very tightly controlled, so I have trouble with it being that. On the other hand, Dumbledore seems pretty fast and loose with his Portkeys so maybe on occassion he creates them for Hagrid. As the Hagrid's comment as the return from the Hut on the Rock, there is something odd about the way Hagrid says he 'flew' that makes me think that when he said it there were indeed quote marks around the word 'flew'. Hagrid seem to have come to the realization that Harry doesn't really know that much about the magical world, and Hagrid doesn't know exactly how much he is allowed to say. So, when Harry asks how Hagrid go there, and Hagrid replies 'he flew', I think it was just a short- cut way for Hagrid to answer the question without getting into a long detailed explanation of /exactly/ how he got there. Consequently, I don't think we can take 'flew' as being absolutely literal. Yet, I do think we can be certain that he arrived on the Hut on the Rock by some magical means. Many people assume he traveled using Sirius's motorbike, but can't quite explain what then happened to the motorbike. Some suspect he arrived by broom, but again what happened to the broom when Hagrid returned by boat with Harry? Some assume he arrived by Thestral or by hippogriff, but they seem like normal sized creatures and Hagrid is anything but normal sized. He could have arrived by Abraxan Flying Horse. They are certainly big enough, but that seems unlikely as there don't really seem to be any (or many) in Britian. So, I based on this and based on Hagrid's rapid disappearance at the train station, I have to conclude that Hagrid can Apparate. Though it is possible that Hargid traveled by a team of Thestrals and a covered wagon or carriage of some type. That would certainly solve the size problem. Still the island doesn't quite seem big enough to land a team of Thestrals. Or, somehow Dumbledore knew where Harry was and created a Portkey for Hagrid to get to the Island, and to later get back to Hogwarts castle.. These are the only possibilities that seem even remotely likely. Just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Mon Feb 5 04:20:51 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 23:20:51 -0500 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 References: Message-ID: <001001c748dd$06418d00$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164620 <<----- Original Message ----- From: lupinlore Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 --Snippet-- What would be his purpose? What would be the purpose in the narrative of keeping him alive, other than to prove that JKR favors the abuse of children? Nothing. Therefore, I'd say he's pretty much done for.>> --Snippet-- <> --Snippet-- <> . --My comments-- His purpose and the purpose of every other character would be determined at some point in book 7, obviously. Come to think of it, by this thinking, Harry Potter has been nothing more than a whining, pretentious, snot nosed prat for the past 7 years and he should die as well. All of his life has been nothing more than fulfillment of a prophecey, linked to the Dark Lord and whining about not getting to play enough Quiditch. After it's all over, what purpose would he have? To find something else to whine about? So I guess he's a goner as well. I see no evidence to support your statements that Severus Snape is a child abuser. Filch is an abuser and Delores Umbridge was an abuser, but what has Snape ever done besides take away house points or make kids do lines in detention. He had plenty of opportunities to abuse these children or even kill them if he'd wanted to. He certainly had the means, but instead of killing he has always protected them. He was not the one longing to use a horse whip on the students or etching lines into their skin. So, unless you define child abuse as the taking away of house points and failure to display a rosey disposition, Snape is no more a child abuser than Hagrid or McGonagall are. I hadn't realized that my theories would be found so offensive. But, to each, his/her own. Of course, I have no way of knowing what theories you've been exposed to in various fandom or what have you. But then again I joined here to discuss theories about the story based on canon. The subject line reads, "The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1 - 5". That makes it hard to discuss theories which are not based on the past. But to ignore the past is pointless. Those who fail to learn from the past are destined to repeat it. So, disagree as you wish, but it all remains to be seen. Until the final volume has been read, these are all theories and opinions. Also, the bit about Snape becoming Hogwarts Headmaster was a joke. I had thought it was obvious when I included it along with fisherman. There's plenty of evidence to prove that JKR is a big supporter of child abuse. Having Professor Snape return to the school where he's been teaching for some 17 years though, that would really be conclusive proof. We could finally string her up for that one, eh? Cheers, Ronin From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Mon Feb 5 05:11:26 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 00:11:26 -0500 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-/Oaths References: Message-ID: <004401c748e4$170fc000$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164621 <<----- Original Message ----- From: dumbledore11214 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1- --Snippet-- Alla: But I am keeping my fingers crossed that JKR will not make him a Headmaster. To subject next generations of Gryffindors to this bastard, sigh, I hope JKR will not do that. >> . --My comment-- I believe that Minerva McGonagall shall be the Headmistress of Hogwarts. I hope she keeps that position for a very long time. With regards to Snape, I'm hoping that we will be enlightened as to why DD was so certain of his loyalty. In my opinion, his true intentions will be revealed in book 7 and we will see that he has been acting in the best interest of the order all along. As DD alluded to so many times in HBP, there are things worse than death and no one person's life is greater than the cause. Speaking of this gets me wondering; JKR seems to be somewhat fond of using oaths and unbreakable vows, etc. I wonder if some similar oath wasn't required of members of the Order of the Phoenix? Knowing how Sirius felt about Snape, I could hardly see him allowing Snape into the house if he hadn't made some sort of solumn vow of loyalty. Of course, Snape could turn out to be the next Dark Lord and kill Lord Voldemort. We will have to wait a few more months to see. Cheers, Ronin From caspenzoe at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 11:27:37 2007 From: caspenzoe at yahoo.com (caspenzoe) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 11:27:37 -0000 Subject: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164622 Snip! > Caspen wrote: > > And, as Julie asks, if she's so loyal, why doesn't Albus trust her > more, and why doesn't he confide in her? It really doesn't make sense > to me, regardless whether she's secretly a hot-head or not. > > > Debbie responded: > > That trust issue looms large, doesn't it? The reason I continue to > be enamored of ESE! McGonagall is that the only other reason I can > come up with for McGonagall to be so out of the loop is very > unpleasant -- it's that McGonagall (like most of the other women in > the story) doesn't really have a narrative function except to serve as > a stereotype spinster schoolteacher. And it does fit -- she's stern, > no-nonsense, competent and efficient, but underneath has a soft spot > for her 'children'. She's a stock character in fiction, the type who > provides atmosphere -- she gets no action, no mystery, and no growth. > > > Carol chimes in: > I think her usually concealed softness or emotionalism is the reason > that DD doesn't trust her with every detail of his anti-Voldemort > plan, that and her already heavy workload and his need-to-know policy. > She doesn't need to know about the blood protection, for example, > because she's not involved. McGonagall is quite competent as a > teacher, disciplinarian, HoH, and assistant headmistress, but that's a > heavy workload for a woman of her age, "sprightly" or not, witch or > not. He only uses her, at least until OoP, for matters directly > related to Hogwarts and its students, and even there it's not clear > what she does for the Order during the summer holidays. something not > too strenuous, probably, involving a disguise as a Muggle. Snip! Caspen: I may be keeping this thread going past it's natural expiration date, but I have to come to the defense of my favorite (albeit possibly ESE/enchanted) Hogwarts teacher here. Plus I am just now getting back to this thread - it's so hard to keep up here. I've no wish to offend, but I have one huge problem with every part of Carol's theory as to why Dumbledore doesn't trust Minerva (above), except her proposition that he distributes all information on a need- to-know only basis. In fact, my huge problem may not even be primarily Carol's, but, (and I am very sorry to say this, as I admire her work so deeply) Jo's -- harking back to the famous interview in which she was aked why there weren't more strong female characters in her HP saga. She responded that she felt both Hermione and Minerva are those characters. BTW, this interview is referenced and, I believe, even linked, in another (and excellent) post in this thread where all JKR's interview comments on Minerva are listed. Unfortunately Carol, and, I doubt this is conscious on your part, every one of the reasons you offer above for Dumbledore's lack of trust in McGonagall, with the exception of "need-to-know," which may be the correct answer for all I know, is just frankly extremely sexist. I fail to see how Minerva's "usually concealed softness or emotionalism," for instance, exceeds Dumbledore's in any way; in fact, it seems to me that we see a lot more teary eyes from him throughout the books. As for "her already heavy workload," how's it any heavier than his? I don't see McGonagall, who actively enabled Hermione to carry an extra-heavy work load in POA, shrinking from any extra work. And what on earth is the justification of these (oft repeated in this thread) words, Carol? "For a woman of her age?" Haven't I just read in this thread that it's generally accepted that Dumbledore is considerably older than Minerva? Didn't she fully recover from the effects of multiple stunnings in OOTP? In the muggle world, statistically, women far outlive men. Is there some canon source for your supposing it to be so different in the magical world as between witches and wizards? If not, I certainly hope you'll reconsider this opinion. I myself am reconsidering the "hot-head" explanation offered by another poster as well. For example, how is Minerva's occasional snippiness even comparable in terms of sheer peeve to Severus' discontinuing of occlumency lessons with Harry? In fact, I'm reconsidering a lot. Again I am sorry to say it, but I have to question the accuracy, if not honesty (given that her own sexism may be unconsious as well) of Jo's response in that interview. Whom, of all the female characters in the books, but Hermione, after all, and after all that time and all those pages since JKR gave that interview, consistantly gets any significant page space in the books? None. In fact, no other female characters in JKR's supposedly (and self-proclaimed -- again see the summarized interviews post) 50/50 Hogwarts environment get any significant page space. As I wrote, Minerva is one of my favorite characters, but other than ESE/enchanted Minerva there is certainly no denying (so far) that JKR does seem content to leave her undevelopped. Maybe I just find the idea of a deliberate disguise more palatible than (in Debbies's words) "that McGonagall (like most of the other women in the story) doesn't really have a narrative function except to serve as a stereotype spinster schoolteacher.... She's a stock character in fiction, the type who provides atmosphere -- she gets no action, no mystery, and no growth." I don't know about anyone else's motives for entertainig an ESE McGonagall or enchanted McGonagall theory, but I'm beginning to suspect that one of mine is a powerful desire to repress my own consciousness of deep and blatant (whether she, herself, is conscious of it or not) sexism on JKR's part. And, I'm feeling in a bit of a peeve toward JKR about now. The more I think about it, the more outrageous it seems; so I think I'll just go away and try to cool off. CaspenPeeved From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 13:46:07 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 13:46:07 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: <001001c748dd$06418d00$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164623 Ronin: > Come to think of it, by this thinking, Harry Potter has been nothing more than a whining, pretentious, snot nosed prat for the past 7 years and he should die as well. All of his life has been nothing more than fulfillment of a prophecey, linked to the Dark Lord and whining about not getting to play enough Quiditch. After it's all over, what purpose would he have? To find something else to whine about? So I guess he's a goner as well. Alla: LOL. There are plenty of reasons because of which Harry can be gone at the end of book 7 ( I do not want him to, but he certainly can be), but orientation to the past is not one of them. I cannot speak for LL, but here is what I mean when I am thinking about character oriented to the past. Let's put aside Harry who, I obviously like and look at Draco, whom I cannot stand. I do not think that he is oriented to the past at all, he has an issue of his allegiance to resolve and life to look forward if he does. And I think all kids are. Now before book 6 I thought Lupin is a goner, since all his friends are gone, nothing to look forward, etc ( of course it is simplistic for RL - person can still find something to look forward to, but for book purposes it does symbolise to me the character is past oriented). When JKR gave him a girlfriend, that to me is one of the strongest signs that Lupin may survive, because he has something oriented to the future, if that makes sense, something he has to look forward to after war is done. It is not a guarantee of course, she can kill them off together, I am just giving you example. So, if in book 7 we learn that Snape say all his life wanted to be researcher in St.Mungo, that would mean to me that he is not oriented to the past. Ronin: So, unless you define child abuse as the taking away of house points and failure to display a rosey disposition, Snape is no more a child abuser than Hagrid or McGonagall are. Alla: I define one of the varieties of psychological abuse as carrying vendetta against innocent child, whose father Snape hated. I provided examples of such vendetta many times, so I can send links to you offlist, if you wish. Mcgonagall, love her as I am comes in my book quite close to what I call psychological abuse of Neville several times, the only reason why I hesitate to call it as such is because I think in those circumstances she would have humiliated any child who did what Neville did, so IMO she did not single him out at least. And Mcgonagall changes her attitude towards Neville, which is good as well. Ronin: > Also, the bit about Snape becoming Hogwarts Headmaster was a joke. I had thought it was obvious when I included it along with fisherman. Alla: Okay. Ronin: > There's plenty of evidence to prove that JKR is a big supporter of child abuse. Having Professor Snape return to the school where he's been teaching for some 17 years though, that would really be conclusive proof. We could finally string her up for that one, eh? Alla: I stated many times that I completely disagree with LL that portraying anything in the story, anything about fictional characters can show us that JKR is supporter of child abuse, if anything I think she was abundantly clear in the interviews that she dislikes Snape's way of teaching, but I as well think that Snape is child abuser. The fact that Umbridge is **more** abusive in my book does not make Snape **not** abuser, he is just *minus one or two* on the scale where Umbridge is *minus 100 or 1000* ( love that comparison) IMO of course, Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 14:24:23 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 14:24:23 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1- In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164624 Alla wrote: > > Actually, even though I do hope that LL is right in a sense that > Snape's character is past oriented, I think that you can be right in > a sense that Snape is the character who got the reprieve, because of > his popularity with the fans. > > So, hope as I am that Snape is dead or live forever in Azkaban at > the end of book 7, I think it is possible that he will survive and > do something at the end, if he is DD!M. > > But I am keeping my fingers crossed that JKR will not make him a > Headmaster. To subject next generations of Gryffindors to this > bastard, sigh, I hope JKR will not do that. Sorry. > > I am hoping that JKR will not go for symbolism of the murderer of > the most beloved Headmaster succeeding him. > > JMO, > > Alla, who will have a box of tissues as well on July 21, but who > will consider those tissues too precious to spend one of them on > Snape. :) > Carol responds: I agree that Snape is probably the character who received the reprieve, either that or she never intended for him to die. But if she's considering the readers' reactions to Snape at all (and not just planning a dramatic reversal that's been planned all along, which believe she's been building up to since she first laid out the plots of the seven books), she'll realize that many readers hate Snape and wouldn't want him as headmaster of Hogwarts. Nor, I think, would the majority of parents in the WW. Snape, we've discovered, has unexpected talents as a Healer, in addition to known brilliance in Potions and (for me) anticipated brilliance in DADA. And, as she said herself, he's a "gift of a character." While Dumbledore's death served a (double) plot function, leaving Harry without a mentor and intensifying the Harry/Snape conflict almost beyond endurance for characters and readers alike, and Sirius Black's death bereft him of his father/brother figure and is (IMO) helping him learn compassion for the losses of others (e.g., Luna), as well as perhaps setting up a trip through the Veil (and back), Snape's death could serve no purpose. I hope I'll step on no toes when I say that Sirius Black was a character without a future, but Snape is another matter. If the WW can be made to understand why he acted as he did and that it would have been worse *not* to kill DD than to kill him (I won't reiterate my reasons for thinking this was the case), Snape might get a short sentence to Azkaban, but it would make more sense for the MoM to put his talents to use, for example, making him do community service as a Healer for St. Mungo's before setting him free to do what he does best, researching spells and potions. I don't think he wants to go back to Hogwarts as either a teacher or headmaster, but he could do Hogwarts a real service by incorporating his potions improvements into a new Potions textbook or two, and he could make a fortune by selling a book on his invented charms and hexes. Far from having no future, Snape could become the character he would have been if he'd never made the mistake of joining the Death Eaters. Carol, hoping that Snape will survive into the Epilogue, having persuaded Harry, the WW, and the majority of readers of the necessity of his actions on the tower and his unshakeable loyalty to Dumbledore From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 14:33:19 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 14:33:19 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar and Quirrell-mort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164625 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "irenetsui" wrote: > > I had been thinking about this for many days now and I wonder if this > question has been brought up before... > > During Harry's first year at Hogwarts, when Voldemort was sharing Quirrell's body, hiding at the back of his head under the turban, how come we did not hear about Harry's scar hurting in DADA classes? We know his scar hurt at the Welcoming Feast when Quirrell had his head facing Harry. I am sure Quirrell would have turned his back to the students at least once in a while? > Carol responds: As you say, Harry's scar only hurt when Quirrell was facing *backwards* and Voldemort was looking at him through the back of Quirrell's head (as when Quirrell was talking to Snape at the breakfast table). It's coincidence, of course, that Snape was looking into Harry's eyes at that very moment. (Wonder what he saw there?) But Voldemort would have to be looking at Harry and thinking about him with anger and hatred for Harry's scar to hurt. Possibly Voldemort saw Harry's expression of pain that morning at breakfast, and certainly he saw his hand go to his scar. He would be careful not to cause any such reaction again and arouse suspicion against Quirrell. Carol, thinking that perhaps we're not supposed to examine such details too closely, just as we're not supposed to wonder what happened all the other times that Lupin became ill in PoA From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 15:47:29 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 15:47:29 -0000 Subject: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164627 Carol earlier: > > I think her usually concealed softness or emotionalism is the reason that DD doesn't trust her with every detail of his anti-Voldemort plan, that and her already heavy workload and his need-to-know policy. She doesn't need to know about the blood protection, for example, because she's not involved. McGonagall is quite competent as a teacher, disciplinarian, HoH, and assistant headmistress, but that's a heavy workload for a woman of her age, "sprightly" or not, witch or not. He only uses her, at least until OoP, for matters directly related to Hogwarts and its students, and even there it's not clear what she does for the Order during the summer holidays. something not too strenuous, probably, involving a disguise as a Muggle. > > Caspen: > > I've no wish to offend, but I have one huge problem with every part > of Carol's theory as to why Dumbledore doesn't trust Minerva (above), except her proposition that he distributes all information on a need-to-know only basis. In fact, my huge problem may not even be primarily Carol's, but, (and I am very sorry to say this, as I admire her work so deeply) Jo's -- harking back to the famous interview in which she was aked why there weren't more strong female characters in her HP saga. She responded that she felt both Hermione and Minerva > are those characters. > > Unfortunately Carol, and, I doubt this is conscious on your part, > every one of the reasons you offer above for Dumbledore's lack of > trust in McGonagall, with the exception of "need-to-know," which may > be the correct answer for all I know, is just frankly extremely > sexist. I fail to see how Minerva's "usually concealed softness or > emotionalism," for instance, exceeds Dumbledore's in any way; in > fact, it seems to me that we see a lot more teary eyes from him > throughout the books. As for "her already heavy workload," how's > it any heavier than his? I don't see McGonagall, who actively enabled Hermione to carry an extra-heavy work load in POA, shrinking from any extra work. And what on earth is the justification of these (oft repeated in this thread) words, Carol? "For a woman of her age?" > Haven't I just read in this thread that it's generally accepted that > Dumbledore is considerably older than Minerva? Didn't she fully > recover from the effects of multiple stunnings in OOTP? > Carol responds: Don't worry. I'm not offended. I've been called worse things than sexist on this list ("List Nazi" or some such thing). But I'm at a loss as to how "quite competent as a teacher, disciplinarian, HoH, and assistant headmistress" could be interpreted as sexist or how "heavy workload" could be interpreted as anything other than fact. (Snape also has an exceptionally heavy workload, but he's half her age.) It seems to me that Dumbledore wants McGonagall where she's most needed, at Hogwarts, which is why he won't let her follow him when he defies Fudge. And we both agree on the need-to-know policy. But there's also no question that McGonagall has a soft spot for Harry beneath her stern exterior. We see her with a tear in her eye more than once. This touch of humanity is not meant, IMO, as a weakness. It's meant to make us care about her. (I did criticize her rule bending and favoritism in another post, but that's not a "sexist" criticism. Most of the Heads of Houses, and notably Snape, favor their own houses.) When I was young, I would probably have taken a position similar to yours. I once believed adamantly that all differences between the sexes were a matter of education and societal expectations in combination with individual personality differences. I now know from long experience that women (in general) really do think differently from men (in general) and really are more prone to motherly instincts than men. JKR, who lost her mother and mourns her, values mother love highly and I think she values the compassion and tenderness that sometimes escape McGonagall highly. But these emotions in McGonagall would, IMO, conflict with any realization of what Harry must face in the future, what he must be prepared to face or die. McGonagall's instinct to shield and protect Harry, to comfort rather than arm him, could prove dangerous, and I think, though, of course, I don't *know*, that his awareness of McGonagall's softer is one reason why DD doesn't share his knowledge of the Prophecy with her. If that's sexist, and I don't think it is, blame JKR and Dumbledore, not me. I think it's common sense. (He doesn't tell the excitable Flitwick about the Prophecy, either.) Carol, who enjoys being disagreed with because it makes her consider the merits of the opposition arguments but who respectfully requests other posters to avoid labeling each other's views as "sexist" (or "bigoted" or "intolerant" or any other label that implies disapproval of that person's philosophy, religion, or moral standards) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 15:54:27 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 15:54:27 -0000 Subject: "Flying" Hagrid and "Home Stretch" reread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164628 bboyminn wrote: > > Note that there are other occassions when Hagrid travels > by magic. For example, after Hagrid gave Harry his ticket > to return to the Dursleys, Harry peeks out the train > window, blinks, and Hagrid is gone. Where did he go in > the blink of an eye? The only reasonable explanations > are he either apparated or took a Portkey. We see that > Portkeys are very tightly controlled, so I have trouble > with it being that. On the other hand, Dumbledore seems > pretty fast and loose with his Portkeys so maybe on > occassion he creates them for Hagrid. > > As the Hagrid's comment as the return from the Hut on > the Rock, there is something odd about the way Hagrid > says he 'flew' that makes me think that when he said > it there were indeed quote marks around the word 'flew'. > Hagrid seem to have come to the realization that Harry > doesn't really know that much about the magical world, > and Hagrid doesn't know exactly how much he is allowed > to say. So, when Harry asks how Hagrid go there, and > Hagrid replies 'he flew', I think it was just a short- > cut way for Hagrid to answer the question without > getting into a long detailed explanation of /exactly/ > how he got there. > > Consequently, I don't think we can take 'flew' as > being absolutely literal. Yet, I do think we can be > certain that he arrived on the Hut on the Rock by > some magical means. Many people assume he traveled > using Sirius's motorbike, but can't quite explain > what then happened to the motorbike. Some suspect he > arrived by broom, but again what happened to the > broom when Hagrid returned by boat with Harry? Some > assume he arrived by Thestral or by hippogriff, but > they seem like normal sized creatures and Hagrid is > anything but normal sized. He could have arrived by > Abraxan Flying Horse. They are certainly big enough, > but that seems unlikely as there don't really seem > to be any (or many) in Britian. > > So, I based on this and based on Hagrid's rapid > disappearance at the train station, I have to > conclude that Hagrid can Apparate. Carol responds: While I agree that Hagrid can Apparate, as the disappearance from Platform 9 3/4 indicates (and as he must have done to get to Godric's Hollow. as well), I don't think he would have told Harry that he flew unless he had actually done so. Hagrid says himself (I think in OoP when he's speaking to Umbridge) that he's too big to fly on a broom, and the Flying Ford Anglia hasn't come into the story yet (neither have the Abraxan Flying Horses that you mention), but the flying motorcycle has, and we know that Hagrid can ride it. Although a storm blows up at nightfall, with waves crashing against the hut, the "low rolls of thunder" don't start until ten minutes before midnight, followed by a creak, a slapping sound, and a crunch (SS Am. ed. 45) that could indicate Hagrid getting off the motorcycle (the seat would creak with relief from its burden ;-) ) and walking toward Harry (on sand first and then gravel?). Hagrid arrives with a boom! (knocking on the door with his gigantic fist) on the stroke of midnight. There's no further mention of thunder, only the storm itself. (If he'd Apparated, wouldn't Harry have heard a gigantic pop! instead of rolls of thunder?) I'm convinced, and always have been, that Hagrid flew to the island on his motorcycle and that the "low rolls of thunder" are really the motorcycle coming in for a landing. It's not clear why it took Hagrid five minutes after the creak to walk to the house. Maybe he had to hide the motorcycle (which somehow accounts for the crunch?). At any rate, the slapping sounds are almost certainly made by Hagrid's huge feet on the soggy sand. Carol, pretty sure that the motorcycle is "living" in the Forbidden Forest with its friend, the Flying Ford Anglia, and that Hagrid will tell its story when it shows up again in DH From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Feb 5 16:58:02 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 16:58:02 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Will Snape live or die and why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164629 > Quick_Silver: > While I generally lean towards Snape/Lily as an explanation of > Snape's remorse, etc. I would argue that the life debt is an inherent > part of Snape's greater regret/switching sides/spying/bringing down > Voldemort because it reveals his character. To me the fact that Snape > can acknowledge/understand what he owes James (i.e. the life debt) > speaks to some sense of underlying morality and concept of > honor/ethics. This is in contrast to Peter Pettigrew who apparently > disregards his life debt to Harry and is thus shown as having > apparently no underlying sense of morality. Magpie: Oh, I agree it all comes together in Snape--it's the way he always is all the time. I didn't mean to imply that he saw the Life Debt as something to get around or get out of the way Peter does. I think the distinction I was making was just to realize that the way Snape feels about James now read to me as more of a hint about his greater personality rather than the main motive, if that makes sense. Like, rather than the Life Debt being something that might trap Snape later (the way it seems to be with Peter, who's somebody who wouldn't naturally care about owing someone) it's something that says something about Snape's personal code. Even long after James is dead it still bothers him and he wants to make it right. Alla: LOL. There are plenty of reasons because of which Harry can be gone at the end of book 7 ( I do not want him to, but he certainly can be), but orientation to the past is not one of them. I cannot speak for LL, but here is what I mean when I am thinking about character oriented to the past. Let's put aside Harry who, I obviously like and look at Draco, whom I cannot stand. I do not think that he is oriented to the past at all, he has an issue of his allegiance to resolve and life to look forward if he does. And I think all kids are. Now before book 6 I thought Lupin is a goner, since all his friends are gone, nothing to look forward, etc ( of course it is simplistic for RL - person can still find something to look forward to, but for book purposes it does symbolise to me the character is past oriented). When JKR gave him a girlfriend, that to me is one of the strongest signs that Lupin may survive, because he has something oriented to the future, if that makes sense, something he has to look forward to after war is done. Magpie: I admit, that's the way I lean as well. Snape seems like a character whose directed in one particular way to make up something from the past, and while I can certainly imagine him doing something with his life if he lived (he's still intelligent and skilled and could be a valuable person to work for others) I feel like storywise death might be the way JKR feels he should go. Lupin/Tonks had the same effect on me about Lupin--I expected his death way more before that happened. If there is a character that orients Snape towards the future it is Draco--though of course that's still older generation protecting and guiding the younger. -m From blink_883 at hotmail.com Mon Feb 5 17:00:52 2007 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 17:00:52 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar and Quirrell-mort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164630 Carol wrote: > As you say, Harry's scar only hurt when Quirrell was facing > *backwards* and Voldemort was looking at him through the back of > Quirrell's head (as when Quirrell was talking to Snape at the > breakfast table). It's coincidence, of course, that Snape was looking > into Harry's eyes at that very moment. (Wonder what he saw there?) > > But Voldemort would have to be looking at Harry and thinking about him with anger and hatred for Harry's scar to hurt. Possibly Voldemort saw Harry's expression of pain that morning at breakfast, and certainly he saw his hand go to his scar. He would be careful not to cause any such reaction again and arouse suspicion against Quirrell. .... Whirlegirl replies: I think the clue is in the 'seeing'. Some points that may help clarify; 1. Quirrel was talking to Snape, wearing a turban. 2. Voldemort is sharing Quirrel's head. I think we could assume that Voldie could sense what Quirrel is thinking. which brings me to point 3... 3. Maybe Voldemort was *actually* pissed off at Snape, as he knew (well, at any rate he could HEAR) that Quirrel was talking to SS. So, that means that at that point in time, due perhaps to their proximity, Harry was able to pick up on Voldie's anger/hatred at being in the presence of *Snape*. It is possible as Snape says in HBP (to Bellatrix) that Voldemort *thought he was DD!M* - never mind whether *we* think so or not. Finally, Voldie does (if i'm not mistaken - i guess i should reread PS!) ask Quirrel to take his turban off to see Harry. Apologies if this last point is incorrect, but the rest still stands, and explains how Quirrel could turn around in lessons and Harry not feel a thing. WG* From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Mon Feb 5 12:20:56 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 07:20:56 -0500 Subject: Harry's scar and Quirrell-mort References: Message-ID: <004c01c74920$16bffb10$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164631 Irene: << --Snippet-- During Harry's first year at Hogwarts, when Voldemort was sharing Quirrell's body, hiding at the back of his head under the turban, how come we did not hear about Harry's scar hurting in DADA classes? >> Ronin: In my opinion, it was just because Lord Voldemort was very weak. Being in that loathsome form he was forced to exist in, as well as the struggle to control his host, I would expect that he was not very strong at all. In later books, such as in OotP for example, The Dark Lord had returned to full life, but still only affected Harry's scar when he was experiencing great emotions. As his strength grew, so did his ability to effect Harry and try to guide him to gain the orb. That is my guess. It may also be that Harry was not in tune with his own magical senses yet, as a first year student who grew up with Muggles. I believe that everything is worth a second thought in the Harry Potter universe. JKR doesn't seem to write anything lightly and when we think something is trivial, it ends up being significant in one of the later volumes. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Feb 5 17:09:22 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 17:09:22 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164632 Considering that locked room, the most mysterious thing about it is if it's just love behind it as most assume then why is it locked? I would think you'd want to set love free and get into the world. There must be something besides ordinary vanilla love in that room, love on steroids or something that makes it downright dangerous. Or maybe the Ministry wizards didn't lock it and are in fact trying to unlock it, but without success. Maybe in book 7 Harry will find a way to unlock it, something even Dumbledore couldn't do. He knows that opening the door is the only way to destroy Voldemort but Harry also knows that if he does so he will die too; remember that powerful "old magic" involves sacrifice. Perhaps in the second to the last chapter, the one just before epilog where the adult lives of the surviving characters are described, Harry opens that door and Harry Potter is no more. Maybe that also explains the gleam of triumph in GOF seen in Dumbledore's eye immediately followed by sorrow. Whatever that was about it seems clear to me it must have involved having a glorious idea followed by a very sad idea. The most glorious idea I can think of is a way to defeat Voldemort, the saddest idea I can think of is Harry's death. But even if I'm wrong and the second to last chapter of the last book is not entitled "The Man Who Died" and Harry survives, do you think the series will have a happy ending? To put it more concretely, will you be happy when you read the last page or will you have a tear in your eye? I think that largely depends on if Harry is happy on the last page. Personally I think if Harry survives he will be crippled emotionally and perhaps physically as well. Eggplant From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Mon Feb 5 15:38:34 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 10:38:34 -0500 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1- References: Message-ID: <000e01c7493b$b6e0c370$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164633 Carol wrote --Snippet-- <> --My comments-- Well spoken, Carol. I love the idea of Snape putting his teachings in the form of a textbook. Harry learned so much, just from Snapes scribblings in less than one year when he was able to take the teachings of Snape unknowingly. His personal feelings for Snape never came into play and he was able to gain fromSnape's teachings without preconceived judgements. I think that any member of the house of Slytherin is destined to be pre-judged by anyone outside of that house, just because most dark wizards and witches came from that house. But every house is founded on it's particular strengths and should not have to have such a reputation attached to it. I also agree with you about Snape's actions on the tower and becoming a DE was a mistake. I'm sure that Snape only joined because it was the only place he felt he might fit in. He had led a tormented existence throughout his school days, his home life was obviously not any better and his hatred for James Potter may have also driven him to take up with the opposing side. Anyway, I do hope that your idea of Snape as the writer of textbooks comes to pass. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From fairwynn at hotmail.com Mon Feb 5 17:45:09 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 17:45:09 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1- In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164634 > Alla wrote: > > > > Actually, even though I do hope that LL is right in a sense that > > Snape's character is past oriented, I think that you can be right in > > a sense that Snape is the character who got the reprieve, because of > > his popularity with the fans. wynnleaf Snape's actions in Deathly Hallows have probably been mostly planned for a long time, maybe since the beginnings of the series. I tend to doubt that Snape was the one who got the reprieve, because I think JKR has been planning his outcome throughout. If she had planned for him to die, I'd expect his death would be very important to the plot and therefore unlikely to be something that just happened not to work out in the end. Or even something that she'd decide to change for the sake of fans. > > Alla, who will have a box of tissues as well on July 21, but who > > will consider those tissues too precious to spend one of them on > > Snape. :) wynnleaf Having stated my comments above, I don't think JKR is highly likely to kill off Snape. Someone (can't recall who) suggested that Snape might have to die in the same way Sidney Carton had to die. But Snape is not the protagonist, nor is there likely to be only one death on the "good side" in the last book. I expect there to be more than one opportunity to pull out the tissues. In a series which has already seen several sacrifices on the good side, and which will likely see a couple more in DH, I don't think JKR is in any position to *need* a particular sacrificial death for the sake of themes, or literary arc, etc. Unless Harry dies, DH will not be a "Tale of Two Cities" kind of story, where the whole book works toward the ultimate sacrifice at the end. Even then, it seems (given that there's an epilogue) a little bizarre to think of Harry dying. Think -- Harry dies in ultimate end-of-book sacrifice, but unlike ToTC -- which makes grand use of the sacrifice to close the book -- we suddenly get a nice epilogue and what happens to everyone else. Huh? Anyway, as regards Snape, what I'm getting at is this: 1. Snape (especially if he's DDM and if it is over dealing with Snape that Harry finds his most personal growth in the series), is one of the most important characters in the series. 2. Two other major characters have died, and probably at least one other non-Snape character in book 7. In GOF Harry dealt with the death of someone he didn't know well. OOTP and HBP have seen Harry deal with two important deaths. DH is likely to see him deal with yet another -- and all people, but Cedric, are those he actually *cares* about and will probably feel guilty over (Harry seems to feel unwarrented guilt over Cedric and Sirius' deaths, and probably will over Dumbledore, too). So Harry is already going to have to be dealing with death and guilt over people he cares about, even into DH. 3. Harry's going to have to deal with a lot of other issues with Snape -- the hate, forgiveness, trust parts. This is *Harry's* story, ultimately, not Snape's. If it were Snape's story, I could maybe see the Sidney Carton fate for him. But it's not his story. This is a story of what Harry must deal with, what he has to learn, etc. I don't think that Snape is a character whose death Harry is going to need to "deal with." It's Snape the person and what he's done -- not the loss of Snape -- that will challenge Harry. Conclusion: JKR has and will have Harry facing deaths of others. He learns and grows through those challenges. But that's not the challenges he learns and grows from with Snape -- it will be the living Snape that is a challenge for Harry's growth. Snape's death would be more-or-less superfluous in terms of Harry's character growth and development needs. Carol: While Dumbledore's death served a (double) plot function, > leaving Harry without a mentor and intensifying the Harry/Snape > conflict almost beyond endurance for characters and readers alike, and > Sirius Black's death bereft him of his father/brother figure and is > (IMO) helping him learn compassion for the losses of others (e.g., > Luna), as well as perhaps setting up a trip through the Veil (and > back), Snape's death could serve no purpose. wynnleaf Agreed as per above. Carol > Far from having no future, Snape could become the character he would > have been if he'd never made the mistake of joining the Death Eaters. wynnleaf Indeed, I think the series could *use* the example of someone who truly finds redemption, rather than having to die to get it. By the way, if Snape is DDM, then one thing JKR will have been showing us is that everyone on the "good" side is not pretty, nice, and pleasant. And that we can't just judge on the basis of "whoever likes Harry is a good guy" and "whoever dislikes Harry is a bad guy." In some ways, if JKR really wants to make that point, I think she almost *has* to keep Snape alive -- to live on being just as unpleasant, sarcastic, and insulting as always, but *still* on the good side. wynnleaf From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 18:02:47 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:02:47 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1- In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164635 > wynnleaf > Indeed, I think the series could *use* the example of someone who > truly finds redemption, rather than having to die to get it. > > By the way, if Snape is DDM, then one thing JKR will have been > showing us is that everyone on the "good" side is not pretty, nice, > and pleasant. And that we can't just judge on the basis of "whoever > likes Harry is a good guy" and "whoever dislikes Harry is a bad > guy." > > In some ways, if JKR really wants to make that point, I think she > almost *has* to keep Snape alive -- to live on being just as > unpleasant, sarcastic, and insulting as always, but *still* on the > good side. Alla: Yes, true. There is a possibility though that she may want to make a point - that sometimes people who do bad things in their everyday life, could indeed upper their evilness to become Big Baddies, that it happens sometimes and not everybody who tries to work for redemption has the inner strength to stay on that path. It is funny, I so often hear that to make Snape not to be on good side would be a cliche (not from you, in general), but I think that the lesson - not everybody who likes Harry is on good side and vice versa can be just as cliche, no? JMO, Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 18:14:18 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:14:18 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164636 eggplant wrote: > > Considering that locked room, the most mysterious thing about it is if it's just love behind it as most assume then why is it locked? I would think you'd want to set love free and get into the world. There must be something besides ordinary vanilla love in that room, love on steroids or something that makes it downright dangerous. Or maybe the Ministry wizards didn't lock it and are in fact trying to unlock it, but without success. Maybe in book 7 Harry will find a way to unlock it, something even Dumbledore couldn't do. He knows that opening the door is the only way to destroy Voldemort but Harry also knows that if he does so he will die too; remember that powerful "old magic" involves sacrifice. Perhaps in the second to the last chapter, the one just before epilog where the adult lives of the surviving characters are described, Harry opens that door and Harry Potter is no more. > > Maybe that also explains the gleam of triumph in GOF seen in Dumbledore's eye immediately followed by sorrow. Whatever that was about it seems clear to me it must have involved having a glorious idea followed by a very sad idea. The most glorious idea I can think of is a way to defeat Voldemort, the saddest idea I can think of is Harry's death. > > But even if I'm wrong and the second to last chapter of the last book is not entitled "The Man Who Died" and Harry survives, do you think the series will have a happy ending? To put it more concretely, will you be happy when you read the last page or will you have a tear in your eye? I think that largely depends on if Harry is happy on the last page. Personally I think if Harry survives he will be crippled emotionally and perhaps physically as well. Carol responds: "Love on steroids!" Colorfully expressed. Certainly Love, if that's what's in the room, is, like Truth, a beautiful and dangerous thing. (Your post makes me think of Pandora's Box, with all the evils loosed on the world but Hope still trapped inside.) I don't think, BTW, that ancient magic necessarily involves sacrifice. The Dark Arts Voldemort practices are also ancient. Their antithesis is Love magic, but Love isn't necessarily sacrificial. (I do think, though, that Harry will have to be *willing* to sacrifice himself, but we've seen that trait in him since SS/PS. I very much doubt that JKR would give away the plot by titling the last chapter "The Man Who Died." (And I know this is silly and irrelevant, but I have trouble thinking of a seventeen-year-old as a man in any case.) I also don't think that JKR will kill Harry for a variety of reasons, ranging from the Prophecy, which seems to imply that only one will die (obviously Voldemort) to JKR's own feelings about having put Harry through so much grief for seven books. And while I disagree that Harry will be crippled emotionally or physically by the experience (like Frodo), and I don't think that he'll lose his powers (except possibly those acquired from Voldemort), of course, he'll be sadder but wiser at the end of the series. That's what growing up is all about. He will have lost even more friends than he's already lost, perhaps Hagrid or the Weasley Twins, and he will have spent the first seventeen years of his life very differently than he would have done if someone else, say Neville, had been the Chosen One and his parents had somehow survived VW1 unscathed. His world is already changed. Hogwarts (which I think he'll return to a year late to finish his education) will never be the same. 12 GP, even if he cleans it up and gets rid of Mrs. Black's portrait and Kreacher, will always remind him of his lost godfather. Even if Harry makes a fresh start as Just!Harry, talented young Auror whom the WW has finally forgotten as it turns its collective mind to everyday concerns, he'll never forget his suffering, but, like a young British soldier returning from World War II (a war that most soldiers felt wholly justified in having fought), he'll find the strength and hope to make a new beginning in the world he has saved (unlike poor Frodo, who has to go into the Uttermost West to find healing and peace). As for a happy ending vs. an ending that will bring tears to my eyes, I don't think those endings are mutually exclusive. IOW, I expect to "cry for happy." Voldemort will be dead, but so will several other characters on both sides, and Harry will have undergone a terrible ordeal in ridding the world of Voldemort. Possibly he'll have briefly encountered his parents and Sirius Black and Dumbledore, whom he's not ready to join yet and will have to leave behind. So, unlike the characters who shot magical fireworks into the sky and threw parties to celebrate the first defeat of Voldemort, my desire to celebrate will be countered by my awareness of the deaths and suffering that he caused, and I'll feel that celebration is at best premature. (And, of course, I'll be in mourning for the end of the series, however much I'll still want to analyze it. :-) ) At any rate, I have every confidence that JKR can bring about a poignant, bittersweet ending that brings tears to all but the most jaded reader's eyes and yet have Harry survive to attend Hogwarts for a belated seventh year along with Ron, Hermione, and Neville (and Ginny, who will now be in the same year as Harry, having attended Hogwarts throughout DH). I not only want but expect Harry to live. Carol, who will, of course, be inconsolable if Snape dies, "happy" ending or otherwise, but expects to cry only happy tears for Harry From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Feb 5 18:16:41 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:16:41 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164637 > Alla: > > So, if in book 7 we learn that Snape say all his life wanted to be > researcher in St.Mungo, that would mean to me that he is not > oriented to the past. Pippin: We now know that Snape has extensive knowledge of DADA, equal or surpassing Dumbledore (who could not save himself from the ring curse and called on Snape to save Katie instead of doing it himself.) I think it would be a tragedy for the whole WW if this knowledge was lost. Dark wizards will have to be fought again whether Voldemort himself stands or falls. We know that Aurors have additional training, and I think it would symbolized the new understanding between Harry and Snape (if such comes to pass, of course) if Harry continues his plans to become an auror and takes further instruction from Snape. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 18:39:04 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:39:04 -0000 Subject: Snape oriented to the past? WAS: Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164638 > > Alla: > > > > So, if in book 7 we learn that Snape say all his life wanted to be > > researcher in St.Mungo, that would mean to me that he is not > > oriented to the past. > > Pippin: > We now know that Snape has extensive knowledge of DADA, > equal or surpassing Dumbledore (who could not save himself from the > ring curse and called on Snape to save Katie instead of doing it himself.) > I think it would be a tragedy for the whole WW if this knowledge > was lost. Dark wizards will have to be fought again whether > Voldemort himself stands or falls. > > We know that Aurors have additional training, and I think it would > symbolized the new understanding between Harry and Snape (if > such comes to pass, of course) if Harry continues his plans to > become an auror and takes further instruction from Snape. Alla: LOL. Are you arguing that poor Harry did not suffer enough through the series and he has to continue suffer by communicating with the man who had a hand in why his misery started and whom he watched kill his mentor? I hope not, I truly hope that if Harry survives and Snape survives, Harry would not ever have to see Snape again. But having said all that, if Snape indeed expresses the desire to teach DADA to somebody in book 7 (to aurors or whoever), yes, that would mean to me that Rowling is giving him something to do after war is done. JMO, Alla. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Feb 5 18:40:22 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:40:22 -0000 Subject: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164639 Caspen: > > As I wrote, Minerva is one of my favorite characters, but other than > ESE/enchanted Minerva there is certainly no denying (so far) that JKR > does seem content to leave her undevelopped. Maybe I just find the > idea of a deliberate disguise more palatible than (in Debbies's > words) "that McGonagall (like most of the other women in the story) > doesn't really have a narrative function except to serve as a > stereotype spinster schoolteacher.... She's a stock character in > fiction, the type who provides atmosphere -- she gets no action, no > mystery, and no growth." I don't know about anyone else's motives for > entertainig an ESE McGonagall or enchanted McGonagall theory, but I'm > beginning to suspect that one of mine is a powerful desire to repress > my own consciousness of deep and blatant (whether she, herself, is > conscious of it or not) sexism on JKR's part. Pippin: JKRed ask us not to judge the 'witches only play traditional roles' issue till we had all seven books. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-cbc-rogers.htm But no, I don't think that's true. I've said this before. I sometimes feel frustrated in that I'm just over halfway through the series. It's like being interrupted halfway through a sentence and someone saying, "I know what you're going to say." No, you don't. When I've finished, then we can have this discussion, because at the end of book seven, then I can talk about everything in a full and frank way. -- But I doubt JKR would have placed McGonagall in such a difficult position if she meant to leave the character undeveloped. If McGonagall continues as Head she will face huge challenges, even if, with Harry gone, Voldemort decides to leave Hogwarts alone for awhile (fat chance, IMO.) She has a number of staff positions to fill, not only DADA but Transfiguration, Head of Gryffindor, and Deputy Head. Any guesses whom she might pick, considering that JKR says we've met all the important characters? Pippin From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 18:45:10 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:45:10 -0000 Subject: "Flying" Hagrid and "Home Stretch" reread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164640 --- "justcarol67" wrote: > > bboyminn wrote: > > > > ... I don't think we can take 'flew' as being > > absolutely literal. Yet, I do think we can be > > certain that he arrived on the Hut on the Rock by > > some magical means. Many people assume he traveled > > using Sirius's motorbike, but can't quite explain > > what then happened to the motorbike. ... > > > > ... > > Carol responds: > While I agree that Hagrid can Apparate, as the > disappearance from Platform 9 3/4 indicates ..., I > don't think he would have told Harry that he flew > unless he had actually done so. ... the flying > motorcycle has, and we know that Hagrid can ride it. > ... > > I'm convinced, and always have been, that Hagrid flew > to the island on his motorcycle and that the "low rolls > of thunder" are really the motorcycle coming in for a > landing. ... > bboyminn: I can't say you are wrong, but you have still avoided the key question; what happened to the Motorbike? It doesn't seem reasonable that Hagrid would abandon a clearly magical and probably illegal device on what appears to be a relatively barren island with little or no cover. Certainly, the Dursleys are going to wake up the next morning and look around for their boat. Presumably the owner of the island at some point is going to come out to make sure no damage was done. Can't have an unexplained and somewhat dodgy motorbike appear out of no where on a deserted island. Further, what purpose does using the motorbike serve if Hagrid has other means of magical travel like Apparation or Portkey. Certainly, they knew exactly where Harry was or they wouldn't have been able to find him. If they know precisely where he is then a Portkey is no problem. I think based on the descriptions of the sensations, any means of magical travel could be summarized as simply he 'Flew'. That's not literally correct, but to someone who knows little about magic, it's as good a description as any. > Carol, pretty sure that the motorcycle is "living" > in the Forbidden Forest with its friend, the Flying > Ford Anglia, and that Hagrid will tell its story when > it shows up again in DH bboyminn: So, do you think they will mate and produce a pack of little three-wheel ATV's? ;) Steve/bboyminn From cindiknits at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 17:13:38 2007 From: cindiknits at yahoo.com (cindiknits) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 17:13:38 -0000 Subject: "Flying" Hagrid and "Home Stretch" reread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164641 > bboyminn wrote: > > > > Note that there are other occassions when Hagrid travels > > by magic. For example, after Hagrid gave Harry his ticket > > to return to the Dursleys, Harry peeks out the train > > window, blinks, and Hagrid is gone. Where did he go in > > the blink of an eye? The only reasonable explanations > > are he either apparated or took a Portkey. We see that > > Portkeys are very tightly controlled, so I have trouble > > with it being that. On the other hand, Dumbledore seems > > pretty fast and loose with his Portkeys so maybe on > > occassion he creates them for Hagrid. > > > > Carol responds: > While I agree that Hagrid can Apparate, as the disappearance from > Platform 9 3/4 indicates (and as he must have done to get to Godric's > Hollow. as well), I don't think he would have told Harry that he flew > unless he had actually done so. Hi: I hardly ever post, so I hope I did the snippage thing correctly. I agree that it's not exactly clear how Hagrid got to the hut-on-the-rock, but it seems illogical to me that he apparated. Hagrid was expelled from Hogwarts in his third year. Apparition lessons don't begin until 5th(?) year, and it's a very difficult thing to learn. Hagrid doesn't strike me as being a particularly gifted wizard (he couldn't even turn Dudley into a pig), so unless he got individual training from Dumbledore or something, I have a hard time buying the idea that he could have learned to apparate. I could be underestimating him, of course! He's had a long time since his expulsion to learn to apparate; it's just that there doesn't seem to be any evidence from canon (that I can remember as I sit in my office without my books) to suggest that Hagrid has been learning advanced magic. cindiknits From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Feb 5 18:57:28 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:57:28 -0000 Subject: Snape oriented to the past? WAS: Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164642 > > Alla: > > LOL. Are you arguing that poor Harry did not suffer enough through > the series and he has to continue suffer by communicating with the > man who had a hand in why his misery started and whom he watched kill > his mentor? Pippin: Of course I am talking about DDM!Snape. But you know that I did say I hoped there would be a new understanding between them. I'm guessing that once Harry understands why Snape hated him, he will forgive Snape for it, and that once Snape understands what really happened with the prank he will no longer have such a grudge against James. As you know, I don't believe Snape killed Dumbledore, so that won't be an issue once Harry realizes it. As for Snape betraying the Potters, I think Snape has redeemed himself for that already, and Harry needs to realize that too. If Harry never has to see even DDM!Snape again, then JKR's pronouncements about tolerance are going to sound awfully hollow to this reader. IMO, JKR has to show that people can get over bad blood. Pippin From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Mon Feb 5 19:15:02 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 11:15:02 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702051115m294b3do518e7dc40aca59e0@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164643 Snip! > Caspen wrote: > > And, as Julie asks, if she's so loyal, why doesn't Albus trust her > more, and why doesn't he confide in her? It really doesn't make sense to me, regardless whether she's secretly a hot-head or not. > Debbie responded: > > That trust issue looms large, doesn't it? The reason I continue to be enamored of ESE! McGonagall is that the only other reason I can > come up with for McGonagall to be so out of the loop is very > unpleasant -- it's that McGonagall (like most of the other women in > the story) doesn't really have a narrative function except to serve as a stereotype spinster schoolteacher. And it does fit -- she's stern, > no-nonsense, competent and efficient, but underneath has a soft spot > for her 'children'. She's a stock character in fiction, the type who provides atmosphere -- she gets no action, no mystery, and no growth. > > Carol chimes in: > I think her usually concealed softness or emotionalism is the reason > that DD doesn't trust her with every detail of his anti-Voldemort > plan, that and her already heavy workload and his need-to-know policy. > She doesn't need to know about the blood protection, for example, > because she's not involved. McGonagall is quite competent as a > teacher, disciplinarian, HoH, and assistant headmistress, but that's a > heavy workload for a woman of her age, "sprightly" or not, witch or > not. He only uses her, at least until OoP, for matters directly > related to Hogwarts and its students, and even there it's not clear > what she does for the Order during the summer holidays. something not > too strenuous, probably, involving a disguise as a Muggle. Caspen: I have one huge problem with every part of Carol's theory as to why Dumbledore doesn't trust Minerva (above), except her proposition that he distributes all information on a need- to-know only basis. In fact, my huge problem may not even be primarily Carol's, but, (and I am very sorry to say this, as I admire her work so deeply) Jo's -- harking back to the famous interview in which she was aked why there weren't more strong female characters in her HP saga. She responded that she felt both Hermione and Minerva are those characters. BTW, this interview is referenced and, I believe, even linked, in another (and excellent) post in this thread where all JKR's interview comments on Minerva are listed. Unfortunately Carol, and, I doubt this is conscious on your part, every one of the reasons you offer above for Dumbledore's lack of trust in McGonagall, with the exception of "need-to-know," which may be the correct answer for all I know, is just frankly extremely sexist. I fail to see how Minerva's "usually concealed softness or emotionalism," for instance, exceeds Dumbledore's in any way; in fact, it seems to me that we see a lot more teary eyes from him throughout the books. As for "her already heavy workload," how's it any heavier than his? I don't see McGonagall, who actively enabled Hermione to carry an extra-heavy work load in POA, shrinking from any extra work. And what on earth is the justification of these (oft repeated in this thread) words, Carol? "For a woman of her age?" Haven't I just read in this thread that it's generally accepted that Dumbledore is considerably older than Minerva? Didn't she fully recover from the effects of multiple stunnings in OOTP? CaspenPeeved Jeremiah: Well, all of that is good and fine. I'd never considered ESE!McGonagall until this thread started. (So, thank you to all who have contributed). I have a few issues about the possibility, though, but it would lead to a Ever So Truly, Deeply Evil McGonagall and I'm not sure I can handle that right now, however? Since I've begun re-reading the series (an annual event I'm sure most of us on this board engage in) I've decided to read it with the ESE!McGoangall eye. So far I've noticed 2 strange things. In the first chapter of PS/SS there are the references to Voldemort. McGonagall can't say the name and tries to wiggle her way out of saying it. DD tries to convince her that saying LV's name is sensible and she reluctantly does so. A DE would not do this but if McGonagall is truly a plant then maybe she would. Reluctantly so, but to keep her cover? would she? The second thing I'm noticing (and it's probably a fashion choice) is that McGonagall wears a lot of Emerald Green. Even as Head of Gryffindor that's a lot of green for her to wear in those books, and to have it mentioned by our beloved author. I know, it probably matched her eyes or looks beautiful with her complexion. But JKR likes to mention the fact that she's in green, and not just any green? emerald green. (I just finished CoS and will be looking into this at every chance). Now, this is all circumstantial and I really don't have any more than that, but I like the chance to read a character from a totally different perspective than what I had ever imagined possible. Hmmmm? Jeremiah: (Looking for more clues and still not convinced, but liking the idea and hoping there's something there?) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Feb 5 19:21:23 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:21:23 -0000 Subject: "Flying" Hagrid and "Home Stretch" reread In-Reply-To: <519924837.20070204213752@mindspring.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164644 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > Today is Day 5 in my reread, and in PS/SS Ch. 5, "Diagon Alley", I > found something odd -- As they leave for London, Hagrid explains > to Harry that he "flew" to the Rock. But how?? There's no sign of > Buckbeak, and I'm sure somewhere Hagrid says he's too big to mount a > broom. So what does he mean?? Is it possible that there's a > Thestral there that Harry of course doesn't see? Or did Hagrid simply > apparate to the Rock (since he seems to disapparate at the end of the > chapter)? > > Any thoughts? Geoff: Contributors to this thread might be interested to have a look back at a short thread entitled "How did Hagrid get to the Hut-on-the-Rock?". It began on 07/12/05, the first message being 144248. There are one or two other ideas put forward there which might trigger some more thoughts in the present discussion. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Feb 5 19:40:21 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:40:21 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164645 eggplant: > Considering that locked room, the most mysterious thing about it is > if it's just love behind it as most assume then why is it locked? I > would think you'd want to set love free and get into the world. > There must be something besides ordinary vanilla love in that room, > love on steroids or something that makes it downright dangerous. Or > maybe the Ministry wizards didn't lock it and are in fact trying to > unlock it, but without success. Maybe in book 7 Harry will find a > way to unlock it, something even Dumbledore couldn't do. Jen: Huh, that's an interesting thought, that it can't be unlocked. I got the impression from Dumbledore people actually study the force in the room so the door can be opened, but I like the idea that not *everyone* can open the door. Maybe Harry couldn't open the door yet because he hadn't overcome all the barriers to accessing his power in OOTP? I'd find that a compelling twist. I believe Lily worked at the DOM and studied that force and while she didn't plan her sacrifice, the combination of having the same power as Harry and her almost unconcious incorporation of what she studied led to her innately knowing what to do. I completely bought Dumbledore's line about a 'force more wonderful and terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature.' Feeling love from and for another is wonderful, but watching someone you love hurting or losing love altogether does feel terribly painful. And someone like Voldemort who has never experienced love finds it agony. That made sense to me after hearing how babies who have never attached to a primary caregiver and experienced physical bonding with another find it difficult to accept physical expressions of love (and perhaps emotional too, my only knowledge is reading a few articles but I remembered these when learning about baby Riddle). Eggplant: > He knows that opening the door is the only way to destroy Voldemort > but Harry also knows that if he does so he will die too; remember > that powerful "old magic" involves sacrifice. Perhaps in the second > to the last chapter, the one just before epilog where the adult > lives of the surviving characters are described, Harry opens that > door and Harry Potter is no more. Jen: I'd say Dumbledore believed the force is what guides Harry to put other people's lives before his own and also what protects him from Voldemort. I'm pretty sure the realization that the locked room is the means to vanquish LV will be Harry's to make, once he puts together what he learned from Dumbledore about his own power and Voldemort's weakness, and when he finally learns Lily's story (regardless of whether she worked at the DOM). Eggplant: > Maybe that also explains the gleam of triumph in GOF seen in > Dumbledore's eye immediately followed by sorrow. Whatever that was > about it seems clear to me it must have involved having a glorious > idea followed by a very sad idea. The most glorious idea I can think > of is a way to defeat Voldemort, the saddest idea I can think of is > Harry's death. Jen: Aw, that strikes me as a sad but true thought. I'm assuming the gleam has to do with Harry's blood weakening Voldemort in some way he overlooked (as usual since he doesn't know love), but it's the same difference if both the power in the room and the blood protection running in Harry's veins are love. Eggplant > To put it more concretely, will you be happy when you read the last > page or will you have a tear in your eye? I think that largely > depends on if Harry is happy on the last page. Personally I think > if Harry survives he will be crippled emotionally and perhaps > physically as well. Jen: I will feel sad if Harry dies. Period. I see where there might be a necessity for that happening although not because his life would always be marred by his experiences if he lived. The prophecy seems to be saying if one dies the other can actually 'live' for the first time since their two fates joined, and I read 'live' to be both literal and figurative. Unlike Carol mentioned, I'm not convinced one of them must live from the way the prophecy is worded. It all depends on where JKR is going with the sacrifice theme: Will Harry, like all those who came before him and gave their lives for him, be the final sacrifice in order for the WW to be free of Voldemort? That appeals to my sense of symmetry if Lily started the tale and Harry ends it the same way. The alternative is that unlike the rest of the people who loved him, Harry will only have to be willing to sacrifice himself and he's already proven he is. Either way, I think the Deathly Hallows could be bookends for the series, referring in the beginning to the All Hallow's Eve when the Potters died, and in the end to the holy/sacred force in the locked room where Voldemort is finally vanquished, and Harry...don't know but hope it's the place where he loses the soul piece connecting him to LV (if he has one) and is finally able to really live. Thanks Eggplant, really nice post and interesting ideas to mull over here. Jen R. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 19:42:39 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:42:39 -0000 Subject: Snape oriented to the past? WAS: Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164646 > > Alla: > > > > LOL. Are you arguing that poor Harry did not suffer enough through > > the series and he has to continue suffer by communicating with the > > man who had a hand in why his misery started and whom he watched kill > > his mentor? > > Pippin: > Of course I am talking about DDM!Snape. But you know that > I did say I hoped there would be a new understanding between them. > I'm guessing that once Harry understands why Snape hated him, > he will forgive Snape for it, and that once Snape understands what > really happened with the prank he will no longer have such a > grudge against James. As you know, I don't believe Snape killed > Dumbledore, so that won't be an issue once Harry realizes it. > > As for Snape betraying the Potters, I think Snape has redeemed > himself for that already, and Harry needs to realize that too. > > If Harry never has to see even DDM!Snape again, then JKR's > pronouncements about tolerance are going to sound awfully > hollow to this reader. IMO, JKR has to show that people can get > over bad blood. Alla: Actually yes I knew that you were talking about DD!M Snape and I was talking about DD!M Snape as well, hehe. Because I do not think that the issue will ever come of non DD!M Snape teaching anybody. I was expressing my hope that even DD!M Snape would not be imposed on Harry. I think it is cruel, yes, I know JKR put Harry through some very very cruel things, lol. But I do believe that if he survives that his life gets somewhat easier, not worse. I do think it would be quite sadistic to Harry if he survives to see the man who helped sell his parents to Voldemort as his teacher. Yes, I hope Harry would move on, but I believe that any friendly understanding between them is not possible after HBP. Believe it or not before HBP I liked reading about scenarious where some sort of grudging understanding comes between these two, but after HBP I sincerely doubt that. But do not get me wrong, I do respect your wish, if you want Harry to continue suffer. After all, after seeing Harry survive, there is nothing more I would **love** to see at the end of HP other than seeing Snape humiliated and /or destroyed forever. So, I totally respect what you want, I just hope it will not come true, just as I am guessing you hope my wish would not come true. Alla From Lana.Dorman at Adelphigroup.com Mon Feb 5 18:39:48 2007 From: Lana.Dorman at Adelphigroup.com (kibakianakaya) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:39:48 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164647 Eggplant wrote > Considering that locked room, the most mysterious thing about it > is if it's just love behind it as most assume then why is it > locked? I would think you'd want to set love free and get into the > world. There must be something besides ordinary vanilla love in > that room, love on steroids or something that makes it downright > dangerous. Or maybe the Ministry wizards didn't lock it and are in > fact trying to unlock it, but without success. Lilygale: I think the Ministry wizards have reason to keep that room locked. I have just finished an essay by Phyllis D. Morris, found over at the HP for Seekers website, about the role of fear in the series. She supports the position that one antidote to fear is love. I agree that love can overcome fear and enable courage. Love allows us to act in ways that enable the happiness and well-being of others, and allow us to overcome our own innate tendencies to think of our own needs first. In other words, Love allows us to act in a way that benefits others (brain dead, can't think of the word). Seems to me that the Ministry, like many government agencies, tends to exert its power by creating fear in its citizenry, not that differently than Voldemort or certain RW governments. So it might not be in their best interests to unleash such a powerful force for change on its citizens. > Maybe in book 7 Harry will find a way to unlock > it, something even Dumbledore couldn't do. He knows that opening > the door is the only way to destroy Voldemort but Harry also knows > that if he does so he will die too; remember that powerful "old >magic" involves sacrifice. But not *all* old magic involves sacrifice. I don't believe the reason the force hasn't been used against LV has to do with being unable to open the door. I think it has to do with being able to control the force once the door *is* opened. And Harry has the courage, the will and the deep desire to use that force, even at the expense of his own life (e.g. his thought about entering the gladiator's arena with his head held high). > Perhaps in the second to the last chapter, the one just before > epilog where the adult lives of the surviving characters are > described, Harry opens that door and Harry Potter is no more. > > But even if I'm wrong and the second to last chapter of the last > book is not entitled "The Man Who Died" and Harry survives, do you > think the series will have a happy ending? To put it more > concretely, will you be happy when you read the last page or will > you have a tear in your eye? I think that largely depends on if > Harry is happy on the last page. Personally I think if Harry > survives he will be crippled emotionally and perhaps physically as > well. I don't believe Harry will be crippled emotionally. Of course JKR might write it that way, but the Harry we know so far is highly resilient emotionally. In fact, part of his resiliency lies with his excellent psychological defense system, the same one that protects him from guilt by blaming Snape for Sirius' death etc. In any case, if Harry lives I would consider it a happy ending. If he dies, than I hope JKR can convince me emotionally that there is good reason for his death. Lilygale, who is not sure how these characters came to be so important in her life, and will genuinely mourn if Harry dies From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Feb 5 20:55:05 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 20:55:05 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164648 "justcarol67" wrote: > I very much doubt that JKR would give > away the plot by titling the last > chapter "The Man Who Died." You could be right but I'm not going to take any chances, I intend to skip over the table of contents until I finished the book. > the Prophecy, which seems to imply that > only one will die (obviously Voldemort) "Neither can live while the other survives" is perfectly consistent with both dieing. Granted the Prophecy does not demand that both die, but it is consistent with it. All we know for sure is that where there are now two eventually there will be only one, or perhaps none. By the way, you don't suppose JKR could be so revolutionary as to let Voldemort win do you? No, of course not, silly question, I apologize. Still, sometimes late at night I wonder if, ., oh never mind. > and I don't think that he'll lose his powers I agree! The very very worst ending of the Potter series would be for Harry and all other wizards to lose their powers to defeat Voldemort and they become Muggles and even worse if they are happy about it. Too many fantasy and science fiction stories end with the object of wonder being destroyed, the astounding alien planet blows up, the incredible creature is killed, the secret to the amazing invention is destroyed, and the time machine is run over by a train and their exciting adventure is forgotten; so everybody can go back to their safe and boring pedestrian lives. For the live of me I can't image a more unsatisfying ending. > like a young British soldier returning > from World War II Many of those noble and incredibly brave young soldiers had been forced to do hideous things, and many of them suffered from Post Traumatic Shock Syndrome for the rest of their lives as a result; If Harry survives I expect he will have the same problem. We may have seen a tiny taste of that in book 5 when Harry gets a little grumpy at his friends and destroys Dumbledore's office. > At any rate, I have every confidence that > JKR can bring about a poignant, bittersweet > ending that brings tears to all but the > most jaded reader's eyes and yet have > Harry survive to attend Hogwarts for a > belated seventh year along with Ron, > Hermione, and Neville and Ginny But those are a list of characters that we readers love the most, if they all survive what is there to cry about? I believe some or all of the characters you mention will die. Eggplant From juli17 at aol.com Mon Feb 5 21:19:21 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 21:19:21 -0000 Subject: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164649 Caspen wrote: In fact, my huge problem may not even be > primarily Carol's, but, (and I am very sorry to say this, as I admire > her work so deeply) Jo's -- harking back to the famous interview in > which she was aked why there weren't more strong female characters in > her HP saga. She responded that she felt both Hermione and Minerva > > are those characters. > > > > Unfortunately Carol, and, I doubt this is conscious on your part, > > every one of the reasons you offer above for Dumbledore's lack of > > trust in McGonagall, with the exception of "need-to-know," which may > > be the correct answer for all I know, is just frankly extremely > > sexist. I fail to see how Minerva's "usually concealed softness or > > emotionalism," for instance, exceeds Dumbledore's in any way; in > > fact, it seems to me that we see a lot more teary eyes from him > > throughout the books. As for "her already heavy workload," how's > > it any heavier than his? I don't see McGonagall, who actively > enabled Hermione to carry an extra-heavy work load in POA, shrinking > from any extra work. And what on earth is the justification of these > (oft repeated in this thread) words, Carol? "For a woman of her age?" > > Haven't I just read in this thread that it's generally accepted that > > Dumbledore is considerably older than Minerva? Didn't she fully > > recover from the effects of multiple stunnings in OOTP? > > > > Carol responds: > Don't worry. I'm not offended. I've been called worse things than > sexist on this list ("List Nazi" or some such thing). But I'm at a > loss as to how "quite competent as a teacher, disciplinarian, HoH, and > assistant headmistress" could be interpreted as sexist or how "heavy > workload" could be interpreted as anything other than fact. (Snape > also has an exceptionally heavy workload, but he's half her age.) It > seems to me that Dumbledore wants McGonagall where she's most needed, > at Hogwarts, which is why he won't let her follow him when he defies > Fudge. And we both agree on the need-to-know policy. > But there's also no question that McGonagall has a soft spot for Harry > beneath her stern exterior. We see her with a tear in her eye more > than once. This touch of humanity is not meant, IMO, as a weakness. > It's meant to make us care about her. (I did criticize her rule > bending and favoritism in another post, but that's not a "sexist" > criticism. Most of the Heads of Houses, and notably Snape, favor their > own houses.) > > When I was young, I would probably have taken a position similar to > yours. I once believed adamantly that all differences between the > sexes were a matter of education and societal expectations in > combination with individual personality differences. I now know from > long experience that women (in general) really do think differently > from men (in general) and really are more prone to motherly instincts > than men. JKR, who lost her mother and mourns her, values mother love > highly and I think she values the compassion and tenderness that > sometimes escape McGonagall highly. But these emotions in McGonagall > would, IMO, conflict with any realization of what Harry must face in > the future, what he must be prepared to face or die. McGonagall's > instinct to shield and protect Harry, to comfort rather than arm him, > could prove dangerous, and I think, though, of course, I don't *know*, > that his awareness of McGonagall's softer is one reason why DD doesn't > share his knowledge of the Prophecy with her. If that's sexist, and I > don't think it is, blame JKR and Dumbledore, not me. I think it's > common sense. (He doesn't tell the excitable Flitwick about the > Prophecy, either.) Julie: I guess I'm somewhere in the middle. I agree that there are differences between men and women, and McGonagall might well be more prone to protect and shield Harry than arm him. OTOH, Lupin would be more likely to do so too, given his character and relationship with Harry. It doesn't mean she can't repress that instinct when necessary, if lives depend on it, or why would she (or any woman) be allowed in the Order? That's what Molly must do when it comes to her sons work for the Order, after all (though of course, she wrings her hands repeatedly over it). I suppose Dumbledore may be old-fashioned enough to not confide Order business and matters pertaining to Harry's part in the defeat of Voldemort because he wants to "protect" her, and McGonagall accepts that for whatever reason. Or perhaps he doesn't involve her deeply because he does think she needs her full attention focused on Hogwarts and its students. Fair enough. Neither makes JKR a sexist writer. I guess my real disappointment with Canon!McGonagall then is that she is such a one note character, which seems to be par for the course with the adult female characters. It's the male characters who are complex and multilayered, shaped by their often painful pasts, given to questionable and conflicting decisions and actions. Snape, Lupin, Sirius, Dumbledore, even Pettigrew and Voldemort have complicated and sometimes mysterious motivations. Meanwhile McGonagall, Molly, Bellatrix and Umbridge are each exactly what they appear to be, stock characters with virtually no gray areas to them. (Yes, *some* of the adult male characters are stock characters too, Hagrid, Arthur, Greyback, but some aren't.) Even Tonks lost most of her potential complexity by HBP. Maybe JKR is more comfortable writing complex and dynamic adult male characters. Maybe Lily will prove to be the exception. Or maybe McGonagall is more then she appears, Enchanted or ESE. Or maybe Tonks is really under deep cover, not mooning piteously over Lupin but is reeling him in so she can expose him as ESE!Lupin. Or maybe Molly is really running an Underground railroad for DEs who've switched sides and she's training them to fight in the final battle. And she's pulled Fleur into her camp. Meanwhile the Weasley males go about their manly business, blissfully unaware... Okay, probably not. But one can dream ;-) Julie From muellem at bc.edu Mon Feb 5 21:21:07 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 21:21:07 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164650 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > But those are a list of characters that we readers love the most, if > they all survive what is there to cry about? I believe some or all of > the characters you mention will die. > colebiancardi: hmmm, did JKR state that we will cry at the end of book 7 over some of the characters deaths? I asked this over the weekend and no one answered, so I'll ask again. Does anyone know what the significance of JKR wishing characters a Happy Birthday? The list of HB's are characters that are not dead (yet). I had always thought it meant they would survive book 7. Or is that just speculation? DD, Sirius, Cedric and Quirrell never got Happy Birthdays.... but anyway, I think this book will have a happy ending - with maybe a DE or two (such as Bella - grrrrrr) dying, maybe Fudge or some other MoM employee. Oh and Voldy. I don't expect the principle players (heroes) to die colebiancardi From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Mon Feb 5 21:37:14 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 13:37:14 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702051337y4c547b8exd6363a9814cbb641@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164651 "justcarol67" wrote: > the Prophecy, which seems to imply that > only one will die (obviously Voldemort) Eggplant "Neither can live while the other survives" is perfectly consistent with both dieing. Granted the Prophecy does not demand that both die, but it is consistent with it. All we know for sure is that where there are now two eventually there will be only one, or perhaps none. ===================================== Jeremiah: I understand that the prophecy mentions "Neither can live while the other survives" and I think it is intended for the present, immediate existance of Harry/LV. But I have to interject a touch of Trelawney. I have always thought, as have nearly all of us, that Trelawney had a crazy, fluke "bulls-eye" as far as divination, but her card readings in HBP have spun my head around so severly I have mental whiplash. Her cards identify Harry when Harry is hiding from Sybil. Her cards detect the "Lightnig-struck Tower" several times throughout HBP. It leads me to suspect that little-Sybil has the strange ability to be a Seer. She has predicted Harry's eminent death since he first stepped foot in her classroom. And, yes this can be seen several ways. Fisrtly, she could mean that Harry kicks the bucket. And I think it's viable and would make a fantastic ending even though I'd love for him to live. Second, it could mean that there are lots of people surrounding Harry who will die. Well, we know this is true. It has happened and will happen even more in the 7th and final blood-bath of the HP series. Third, Sybil is just crazy. She has predictions that hit the target and others where she's just a nutty-old bat who couldn't predict the number of chimes from a clock tower at noon. She's just gotten lucky. Fourth, well, I'm sure there's a fourth and beyond but I can only percieve of three. My office doesn't have a fireplace where I can throw stinky/perfum-y stuff and "gaze into the future." Gut instinct says LV will die. My gut-instinct also says Harry's a gonner as well. The prophecy has a little to do with that, but it's Trelawney's other predictions that are unwavering (ok, she comees out with Harry getting married and having lots of kids in OotP but I think Sybil is being giddy and terribly kind-hearted towards Harry at that point) in her assesment of Harry's personal future. And to keep this in perspective: Why is it not possible for Sirius NOT to be the Grim. Could we have had the vision of the Grim out of Divination class be true and only a coincidence to Siriu's re-entry into Harry's life? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Mon Feb 5 22:07:00 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 14:07:00 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702051407u6e19bd19yef49689edb4736a2@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164652 Julie I guess my real disappointment with Canon!McGonagall then is that she is such a one note character, which seems to be par for the course with the adult female characters. It's the male characters who are complex and multilayered, shaped by their often painful pasts, given to questionable and conflicting decisions and actions. Snape, Lupin, Sirius, Dumbledore, even Pettigrew and Voldemort have complicated and sometimes mysterious motivations. Meanwhile McGonagall, Molly, Bellatrix and Umbridge are each exactly what they appear to be, stock characters with virtually no gray areas to them. (Yes, *some* of the adult male characters are stock characters too, Hagrid, Arthur, Greyback, but some aren't.) Even Tonks lost most of her potential complexity by HBP. =============================== Jeremiah: I'm not going to do the "boys vs. girls" thing, but I want to talk a bit about the ladies you'd mentioned as being one-dimensional, I don't see Molly Weasley as one-dimensional. Not at all. I see her as extremely complex as a mother-figure. The way she handles a house full of young (and old) boys, her terrific fear of losing those close to her, her willingness to join the Order and facilitate is in what she knows best (and I really hate the notion that keeping house is a negative skill. God knows I could use a bit more of it myself and would have the greatest adoration for Molly if she'd come over and clean mine 'casue I stink at it). She hold a family together even though she is distraught at the notion of losing them forever. She brings love and compassion to nearly every situation she's in even if it is in conflict with the other characters. She has a strong resolve and fearlessly voices her opinion. Bellatrix. What would cause someone to go and be a DE? As a woman, what would it take? We can see how LV chooses men as his inner circle, so if you are a woman then what would you need to do to allow yourself to become a participant in LV's army? That's a complex question that she carries with her. Also, there is a difference between the way women kill and men kill. Bellatrix goes for the balls in her fights. That's a complicated issue and maybe there isn't enough room in the stories to have that explained. And Umbridge... She is career-motivated. She has a very dark and sinister side to her. McGonagall would give lines or have you polish trophies. Umbridge, however will have the back of you hand sliced open to permanently scar you... She has aspirations in the MoM. She has skills for fighting as well as persuading people to do her bidding. On the surface she is the cardigan-wearing, fuzzy-kitty-on-a-plate loving "girlish" professor Umbridge. However, have you ever wondered how those playful kittens go on those plates? I think she put a spell on them and trapped them in a plate forever... Hermione is extremely complex. Ginny is very complicated. Professor Sprout is a bit one-dimensional as well as Madame Hooch. I think there are lots of multi-layered female characters and if we sit back and think about them. I actually think there is more going on with the women than the men. I think the men are very "on the surface" when it comes to plot. DD good, LV bad. Harry Good, Draco bad. That kind of stuff. Umbridge is a disagreeable lady who is not evil? just messed-up! LOL IMO the theory doesn't hold water. And we all will remember, if it weren't for Hermione LV would have found a way to get the Stone in the first book ,he'd be back and the story would have unfolded differently. If Hermione didn't' figure out tit was a Baslisk in the second book we'd have totally different stories. If Hermione didn't figure out about Lupin and ? well I think it's clear that even if we only had one female character with complex layers the Hermione brings it all in and outshines every other character: male of female. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 23:22:30 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 23:22:30 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702051407u6e19bd19yef49689edb4736a2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164653 > >>Julie: > >I guess my real disappointment with Canon!McGonagall then is that > >she is such a one note character, which seems to be par for the > >course with the adult female characters. > > > >>Jeremiah: > I'm not going to do the "boys vs. girls" thing, but I want to talk > a bit about the ladies you'd mentioned as being one-dimensional, > > I don't see Molly Weasley as one-dimensional. Not at all. I see her > as extremely complex as a mother-figure. > Betsy Hp: Is she really complex though? I mean, Molly is the "harried mom" complete with a total inability to get the "real point" (on going war, etc.) and a tendency to see her children as cogs in her household machine rather than people in and of their own right. I see JKR milking Molly for comedy. I don't see her giving Molly any sort of depth. > >>Jeremiah: > I really hate the notion that keeping house is a negative skill. > Betsy Hp: I tend to think JKR disagrees with you there. Of course I really, really dislike Molly. A lot. But even through my admittedly tainted view, doesn't JKR tend to have Molly's housekeeping worries seem a bit... trivial, silly even? Like when Harry's heading off to his trial in OotP and Molly decides to try and tame Harry's hair. It annoys and discomforts Harry and seems to illustrate Molly's complete lack of helpfulness in a stressful situation. Rather than being a calming influence, Molly is best at stirring everyone up. When they least need it. It just seems to me that at best JKR means for Molly to be a comedic character, rather than a bastion of the purpose or strength of motherhood. And as a comedic character, Molly is necessarily flat. > >>Jeremiah: > Bellatrix. What would cause someone to go and be a DE? As a woman, > what would it take? > Betsy Hp: Again, I see more stereotyping here rather than complexity. Bellatrix is a weaker version of Lady Macbeth, anything for the cause but without children of her own to sacrifice, all speech but no sleep walking aftermath. She's hot for Lord Voldemort and it seems to end pretty much there. I just don't see the complexity. I think your questions point to a *possible* complexity, but not one JKR has seemed interested in exploring. > >>Jeremiah: > And Umbridge... She is career-motivated. She has a very dark and > sinister side to her. > Betsy Hp: But, but! Umbridge doesn't have any *other* side! She's dark and sinister, and that's about it. I mean, she's a great villain (as is Bellatrix for that matter). Absolutely wonderful to hiss at as she stalks across the stage twirling her mustache, but we don't have any hints of deeper things going on. Which, honestly I don't think JKR *has* to bring to the table. But it does mean that neither Umbridge or Bellatrix bring the same depth to the bad guys that Barty Crouch, Jr. with his daddy-issues does. Though... Perhaps Narcissa fufills this role. She's no white-hat by any means. But she does love her son (and husband apparently), so that does put her at Barty, Jr. level, I think. > >>Jeremiah: > Hermione is extremely complex. Betsy Hp: Agreed. Though, not an adult, so this doesn't really fit into Julie's quest for a complex adult female character. > >>Jeremiah: > Ginny is very complicated. > Betsy Hp: Only if there's something up with her in HBP. Otherwise she's Harry's sugar and a bit of recess before his battle with the big bad. Oh, and his baby-making machine for the wonderful epilogue. However, if it turns out that her utterly horrid behavior in HBP really *was* horrid behavior and not short-hand for "spunky girl!" than yes, I'll grant you Ginny's complexity. At this point though, it's still an open question. And Ginny is still not an adult. Betsy Hp From caspenzoe at yahoo.com Mon Feb 5 23:45:23 2007 From: caspenzoe at yahoo.com (caspenzoe) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 23:45:23 -0000 Subject: Sexist JKR? Was Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164654 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Caspen: > > > > I've no wish to offend, but I have one huge problem with every part > > of Carol's theory as to why Dumbledore doesn't trust Minerva > (above), except her proposition that he distributes all information on > a need-to-know only basis. In fact, my huge problem may not even be > primarily Carol's, but, (and I am very sorry to say this, as I admire > her work so deeply) Jo's -- harking back to the famous interview in > which she was aked why there weren't more strong female characters in > her HP saga. She responded that she felt both Hermione and Minerva > > are those characters. > > > > Unfortunately Carol, and, I doubt this is conscious on your part, > > every one of the reasons you offer above for Dumbledore's lack of > > trust in McGonagall, with the exception of "need-to-know," which may > > be the correct answer for all I know, is just frankly extremely > > sexist. I fail to see how Minerva's "usually concealed softness or > > emotionalism," for instance, exceeds Dumbledore's in any way; in > > fact, it seems to me that we see a lot more teary eyes from him > > throughout the books. As for "her already heavy workload," how's > > it any heavier than his? I don't see McGonagall, who actively > enabled Hermione to carry an extra-heavy work load in POA, shrinking > from any extra work. And what on earth is the justification of these > (oft repeated in this thread) words, Carol? "For a woman of her age?" > > Haven't I just read in this thread that it's generally accepted that > > Dumbledore is considerably older than Minerva? Didn't she fully > > recover from the effects of multiple stunnings in OOTP? > > > > Carol responds: > Don't worry. I'm not offended. I've been called worse things than > sexist on this list ("List Nazi" or some such thing). But I'm at a > loss as to how "quite competent as a teacher, disciplinarian, HoH, and > assistant headmistress" could be interpreted as sexist or how "heavy > workload" could be interpreted as anything other than fact. (Snape > also has an exceptionally heavy workload, but he's half her age.) It > seems to me that Dumbledore wants McGonagall where she's most needed, > at Hogwarts, which is why he won't let her follow him when he defies > Fudge. And we both agree on the need-to-know policy. > > But there's also no question that McGonagall has a soft spot for Harry > beneath her stern exterior. We see her with a tear in her eye more > than once. This touch of humanity is not meant, IMO, as a weakness. > It's meant to make us care about her. (I did criticize her rule > bending and favoritism in another post, but that's not a "sexist" > criticism. Most of the Heads of Houses, and notably Snape, favor their > own houses.) > > When I was young, I would probably have taken a position similar to > yours. I once believed adamantly that all differences between the > sexes were a matter of education and societal expectations in > combination with individual personality differences. I now know from > long experience that women (in general) really do think differently > from men (in general) and really are more prone to motherly instincts > than men. JKR, who lost her mother and mourns her, values mother love > highly and I think she values the compassion and tenderness that > sometimes escape McGonagall highly. But these emotions in McGonagall > would, IMO, conflict with any realization of what Harry must face in > the future, what he must be prepared to face or die. McGonagall's > instinct to shield and protect Harry, to comfort rather than arm him, > could prove dangerous, and I think, though, of course, I don't *know*, > that his awareness of McGonagall's softer is one reason why DD doesn't > share his knowledge of the Prophecy with her. If that's sexist, and I > don't think it is, blame JKR and Dumbledore, not me. I think it's > common sense. (He doesn't tell the excitable Flitwick about the > Prophecy, either.) > > Carol, who enjoys being disagreed with because it makes her consider > the merits of the opposition arguments but who respectfully requests > other posters to avoid labeling each other's views as "sexist" (or > "bigoted" or "intolerant" or any other label that implies disapproval > of that person's philosophy, religion, or moral standards) > Caspen: I'm very glad you're not offended Carol, and that you like disagreement, because I'm afraid I've still plenty. However, before I remove my gloves, I'd like to to congradulate cassyvablatsky, for her excellent and inadequately credited (in my last post) list of citations to JKR's interview comments On Minerva. I'm not a regular poster here - mostly just a lurker who happens to be exercised by this particular issue at the moment - but, I think Cassy has managed to make a huge contribution in her very first post. So welcome Cassy! And congratulations! Carol, I'm not all that young either (though I'm certainly not too old for anything), and I still have to come to the conclusion that my fascination with ESE/enchanted McGonagall at this point in my following of the series, and I've read the whole thing published so far several times now, stems, in large part, from a now (still barely) conscious urge to repress a very sick feeling that JKR's treatment of Minerva thus far is simply sexist abuse. While Pippen's post dredging up new (to me) JKR interview material gives me a tiny bit of hope for some reasonable character development for Minerva, not to mention Lilly and even Petunia, all of whom are, IMO, way too flat, so far, I'm feeling that JKR's teased us with regard to these characters too many times now. There are a lot of interviews in the record in which JKR has promised us new and fascinating information on both Lilly and Petunia, and (thanks to Pippen), apparently, even Minerva, but so far, as far as I'm concerned, she's delivered bupkiss. And she's down to her last book. If I don't see some substantial effort at making good on these teasing hints in the final installment (and why do we even have to wait this long?) I'm going to be very disappointed, and will have to revise my opinion of JKR's talents and literary contribution accordingly, downward. I'm a little disappointed Carol that you haven't really addressed any of my points in your response above: namely, how is Minerva any "softer" on Harry than Dumbledore? I don't believe she is. Like Jeremiah, I too will be beginning my umpteenth and possibly final (depending on how badly Jo disappoints me this summer) re- reading of the entire series soon, and I'll be noting every teary- eyed scene for every character. Care to place a wager on not just whether, but how many male charachters' tears exceed those of Minerva? And how, exactly, is Minerva's workload so much heavier than Dumbledore's? It's not, what with his extra-curricular Wizengamut activities, Voldemort history compilation activities, etc. Finally, why is Minerva's age such an issue for you, while Dumbledore's (who's far older, no? Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here) and Hagrid's (who's the same age, but spends the summer lately in "diplomatic" missions with giants, and spent a recent school year sparring with Grawp) are not? I'm sorry, but I can't see it as anything other than sexist malarky. Unlike you, I do not now, nor have I or in the past believed that "all differences between the sexes [are] a matter of education and societal expectations in combination with individual personality differences." Rather I believe that obvious, factual biological differences are, and, unfortunately continue to be, even, apparently by my erstwhile heroine, JKR, grotesquely exaggerated for political purposes. In short, the first step in discriminating against anyone's humanity is to define them as being as different as possible from oneself. Participation in this process, however benign the personal motive, is, IMO morally egregiuous. Yes, women, are biologically different from men. Yes, these biological differences on average, create, on average, some psychological differences from men (however, there's another post in the "Sex among Hogwarts students?" thread in which another poster recalls how he was adamantly taught to put the notion of the mythical "average" student out of his head) in some - limited - ways. Nevertheless, the most glaring and imprtant fact is and remains that biologically we are all the same species. Biologically therefore, each and every one of us gets one half her or his genetic complement from a member of the opposite sex (except that, biologically, males actully have slightly less genetic material altogether due to the missing leg of their otherwise x, but instead male y, chromosome). Therefore, any "differences," are, in fact, incredibly minor, if not illusory - when viewed in any proper biological perspective. So minor in fact, that they simply do not translate into any reason that age, per se, should be any more an issue for Minerva than for Dumbledore, or any other male character. As I pointed out, and as you failed to address, if anything, age should be more an issue for him, as real, "muggle" women (upon whom you claim to base your sexist assumptions) are in fact, on average, the sturdier sex of the species. So, don't expect me to sit here in my not so young state and respond with "oh, of course,...obviously..." when you excuse JKR'S sexism toward Minerva, based upon Minerva's age and supposed excessive emotionality. By comparison, she's not especially older, frailer or more emotional than any other comparable character in the books. You wouldn't excuse Dumbledore, Hagrid, Snape, or any other character for any of those reasons. Despite the glaring (!) biological fact of JKR's femaleness, she's not entitled to excuses here either, as far as I'm concerned. So, Jo, I sincerely hope you've managed to pull your head out of the sand here in your last book. I'm not a shipper. In fact, I scroupulously skip most specifically shipping threads here, and I don't use the time I save thereby watching soap operas. I'm not eager to learn whether Remus and Sirius were secretly lovers or whether Snape's entire plot trajectory has been dictated by some mysterious unrequited love for Lilly. But, particularly in light of the quote Pippen unearthed, and now that the series is essentially finnished, JKR better have made good on her promises and done better by her female characters, or she'll go down in my book as a last stale gasp of mediocre twentieth century English literature, rather than its first fresh breath of excellence for the twenty-first. For me, at this point, her place and reptutation as a writer are on the line and turn on this issue. CaspenStillPeeved From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Tue Feb 6 00:44:37 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 16:44:37 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: References: <948bbb470702051407u6e19bd19yef49689edb4736a2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <948bbb470702051644k1f2a75d3k1861251db0fdaa02@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164655 >>Julie: > >I guess my real disappointment with Canon!McGonagall then is that > >she is such a one note character, which seems to be par for the > >course with the adult female characters. > > > >>Jeremiah: > I'm not going to do the "boys vs. girls" thing, but I want to talk > a bit about the ladies you'd mentioned as being one-dimensional, > > I don't see Molly Weasley as one-dimensional. Not at all. I see her > as extremely complex as a mother-figure. > Betsy Hp: Is she really complex though? I mean, Molly is the "harried mom" complete with a total inability to get the "real point" (on going war, etc.) and a tendency to see her children as cogs in her household machine rather than people in and of their own right. I see JKR milking Molly for comedy. I don't see her giving Molly any sort of depth. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ? Jeremiah: I don't see the "cogs in her household machine" issue. If you're in a family as large as the Weasleys and the table needs to be set for dinner then you're going to delegate. If you have a bunch of kids that have to get off to school then you're going to bark and nudge? a lot. And I am someone who believes that kids aren't "little adults" and need to be steered a bunch as kids. Teen-agers aren't adults and don't behave like adults, either. I can see Phineus Nigellu's perspectives but he's a Negative-Nancy and has a bad attitude. But Molly has moment where she yells at Fred and George before the Quidditch World Cup and then when they return safe and sound she regrets her words of anger. Also, I do think she' got the point of the "ongoing war" because she was there for the first one. Because she doesn't express it the way others do doesn't mean she'd not aware of the danger. I think she's more aware than others. The men all have this, "save the world from evil" thing going on and Mollie sees the loss of life that will entail. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>Jeremiah: > I really hate the notion that keeping house is a negative skill. > Betsy Hp: I tend to think JKR disagrees with you there. Of course I really, really dislike Molly. A lot. But even through my admittedly tainted view, doesn't JKR tend to have Molly's housekeeping worries seem a bit... trivial, silly even? Like when Harry's heading off to his trial in OotP and Molly decides to try and tame Harry's hair. It annoys and discomforts Harry and seems to illustrate Molly's complete lack of helpfulness in a stressful situation. Rather than being a calming influence, Molly is best at stirring everyone up. When they least need it. It just seems to me that at best JKR means for Molly to be a comedic character, rather than a bastion of the purpose or strength of motherhood. And as a comedic character, Molly is necessarily flat. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ? Jeremiah: I think some modern forms of Feminism look at the mother/home-maker role as deplorable but I don't see how JKR disagrees with me. I think we have a difference of interpretation. My own mother was a home-maker until my father couldn't be the "bread-winner" so she sucked-it-up and got a job to help out and that was 1980. Today she still makes more than my father. I think we all have a tendency to see Mollie as she relates to a woman in a similar situation in our lives be it our own mother r a friend's or even a close relative. Our reaction depends on how that person's life played out. And I have never seen Mollie as "comedic." I think she says funny things on occasion but no more than anyone else. I don't see Mollie stirring anyone up. I do, however, see her an standing up for her views and protecting her children, husband and family. Even her argument with Sirius in OotP ended with her having compassion for Sirius (eventually, but finding it, none the less) and Harry's loss. And, isn't there strength in motherhood? I can't have a child? I can't go through the process of creating a new life? I think it is a great thing to be able to do? kinda gross, sure, but heck! I can't do it? it's a huge responsibility for someone to take on (male or female). Now, I do not hold women on a pedestal just because a baby comes out of them but I do believe that mothers who care for their children the best that they can (and fathers who can do the same? however the parent(s) wish to express their role as it relates to gender and financial situation: stay-at-home-dads, working mothers, single parents, etc.) are doing something special and taking on an enormous task to care for and raise a child. ------------------------------------------------------ > >>Jeremiah: > Bellatrix. What would cause someone to go and be a DE? As a woman, > what would it take? > Betsy Hp: Again, I see more stereotyping here rather than complexity. Bellatrix is a weaker version of Lady Macbeth, anything for the cause but without children of her own to sacrifice, all speech but no sleep walking aftermath. She's hot for Lord Voldemort and it seems to end pretty much there. I just don't see the complexity. I think your questions point to a *possible* complexity, but not one JKR has seemed interested in exploring. -------------------------------------------------------------- ? Jeremiah: But I still ask, what would it have taken to get her to do that? And I do think it's sad that JKR has address it yet. Hot for LV? Well, maybe. (yuck) Maybe. LOL. Maybe she's had the desire to feel like "one of the boys" and scrambles at scraps to prove herself. She boasts in ways that reflect LV's own boastful lies. She is a vocal supporter with extremely high defenses and must have deep, deep fears about herself and her family to be that boisterous and eager to be cruel. Something is definitely stinky about her past. (hee hee? Lady Macbeth? ) --------------------------------------------------- > >>Jeremiah: > And Umbridge... She is career-motivated. She has a very dark and > sinister side to her. > Betsy Hp: But, but! Umbridge doesn't have any *other* side! She's dark and sinister, and that's about it. I mean, she's a great villain (as is Bellatrix for that matter). Absolutely wonderful to hiss at as she stalks across the stage twirling her mustache, but we don't have any hints of deeper things going on. Which, honestly I don't think JKR *has* to bring to the table. But it does mean that neither Umbridge or Bellatrix bring the same depth to the bad guys that Barty Crouch, Jr. with his daddy-issues does. Though... Perhaps Narcissa fulfills this role. She's no white-hat by any means. But she does love her son (and husband apparently), so that does put her at Barty, Jr. level, I think. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ? Jeremiah: I think Umbridge does. I think she has a frilly soft side deep within but since she is so toad-like she cannot convince others to see her that way. She has adopted the cruelty and ridicule that stems from her "ugliness" (and the external perception of her physicality) and uses it to gain her own power. IMO she has "learned" to be cruel in the cruelest ways. Sure, I've extrapolated a bit, but I remember how I used to be as a kids, fat, geeky. I was treated cruelly and I remember the moment when I had the choice to be like the others who treaded me with hatred or to be compassionate and loving. Umbridge hasn't learned that you can get more bees with honey than with vinegar. She's quite tragic to me. ------------------------------------------------- > >>Jeremiah: > Hermione is extremely complex. Betsy Hp: Agreed. Though, not an adult, so this doesn't really fit into Julie's quest for a complex adult female character. -------------------------------------------------- ? Jeremiah: You got me? I wasn't thinking? -------------------------------------------- > >>Jeremiah: > Ginny is very complicated. > Betsy Hp: Only if there's something up with her in HBP. Otherwise she's Harry's sugar and a bit of recess before his battle with the big bad. Oh, and his baby-making machine for the wonderful epilogue. However, if it turns out that her utterly horrid behavior in HBP really *was* horrid behavior and not short-hand for "spunky girl!" than yes, I'll grant you Ginny's complexity. At this point though, it's still an open question. And Ginny is still not an adult. Betsy Hp --------------------------------------------- ? Jeremiah: You got me there, too. However, I still see Ginny as being complex. She seems so sweet on the surface and then you find out she's very devious and ingenious. I'm sure Hermione wouldn't have Ginny as a friend if Ginny was boring and trite. Ginny has learned a lot from Fred and George. She's had Bill and Charlie to look up to because, IMO I don't think they look at her as a "girl" but just as a younger sibling. Mollie never scolds her for not being "lady-like" and, yet, Ginny has wonderful manners and is a well behaved person. Ok, she like to make-out with lots of boys? big deal. So do I. LOL. But I don't think she's very one-dimensional. I also feel there is a lot of emphasis placed on how much a reader is told vs. how much a reader can comprehend. (Not trying to say anyone is a dummy? my god I've had a lot of fantastic posts from all of you, so you're all quite brilliant? ) I see many books where the male characters aren't totally explained but through reading about them you can figure out their history? or possible history. Let us not forget Fleur. I thought she was some trite-boring-mushy-spoiled chick who should be shot between the eyes to save her from the misery of her own life and then? Blam! She's in for the long haul. She love someone for what is within? There is a reason she was picked to be a tri-wizard champion and I'm sure it will come into play during DH. (Honestly, did anyone else think she was going to still want bill after he was mauled? I didn't'). Now, what I whole-heartedly agree to is this: The story line is very male-centric. Harry, Sirius, Lupin, James, Wormtail, Voldemort, Dumbledore, Malfoy. .we can tell the story using only these characters. I do believe that Ron and Hermione are interesting but could be written out. So, I see how the feminist-perspective could be riled (and I agree that there needs to be more female influence in the plot) but when the author is a woman? a single parent who has worked hard to make this story happen? as well as her own life? then I don't think it holds much water, to be honest. Does this mean that women can't be dangerous to the promotion and welfare of other women? Of course they can but I don't see it happening by the writing or these novels. (Characters in the novels do it but not JKR). Plus, what's a good story without a few stock characters? Like "angry" Filch, "bumbling" Hagrid and the "oh-so-feminine" Lockhart ('cause if you say he's Gay I'm gonna scream! I hate the stereotype that implies Lockhart's wardrobe has to do with his sexuality? 'cause that would imply Hermione's bushy hair might mean she's a lesbian and I'm not going there, either?). Oh, that's funny... Hagrid has background... but he is a "dummy" most of the time. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From elfundeb at gmail.com Tue Feb 6 01:30:23 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 20:30:23 -0500 Subject: Unconscious Sexism (Was: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) Message-ID: <80f25c3a0702051730w1b671033m46cb63640dd2b5b4@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164656 Caspen: I may be keeping this thread going past it's natural expiration date, but I have to come to the defense of my favorite (albeit possibly ESE/enchanted) Hogwarts teacher here. Debbie: Actually, I'm happy you revived it; I wasn't done with the topic myself, and it's moving in the direction I was planning to take it. In fact, JKR's treatment of her female characters was the subject of one of my very first posts on this list, lo these many years ago. CassyV: JKR says that although McGonagall is not Dumbledore's equal, she is a `worthy' second in command: [snip] -McGonagall is a wise and powerful female leader (& quite talented at dueling as we saw in HBP!) -McGonagall (along with Lupin) is JKR's ideal teacher: respected (not feared) by the students, determined to do her best for them, equally determined that they should do their bests for her, strict and clever, with high standards and a gift for communication, entirely without favoritism (but with a shrewd idea of who the troublemakers are in her class!) Debbie: I agree that she is all of these things (and the other things I snipped). Yet this just makes it all the more jarring that she was not a part of the first Order of the Phoenix. Carol's list of weaknesses may all be true, but all the Order members seem to have weaknesses that make them genuine security threats, and Dumbledore has a history of offering people second chances. ESE!McGonagall, Enchanted!McGonagall, and CarryingTheTorchForRiddle!McGonagall all keep popping back up because her exclusion wants explanation. Jeremiah: have a few issues about the possibility, though, but it would lead to a Ever So Truly, Deeply Evil McGonagall and I'm not sure I can handle that right now, however? Debbie: Well, in my more lucid moments I have a lot of trouble with ESE!McGonagall myself. But I think our point is that she is a character in need of a compelling backstory, whatever it is. Caspen: Again I am sorry to say it, but I have to question the accuracy, if not honesty (given that her own sexism may be unconsious as well) of Jo's response in that interview. Whom, of all the female characters in the books, but Hermione, after all, and after all that time and all those pages since JKR gave that interview, consistantly gets any significant page space in the books? None. In fact, no other female characters in JKR's supposedly (and self-proclaimed -- again see the summarized interviews post) 50/50 Hogwarts environment get any significant page space. Debbie: I think what's happened here is that while JKR's objective was to portray the WW as devoid of muggle world prejudices so she could focus on the prejudice against muggles and muggleborns peculiar to the WW. But another of her literary devices -- her use of stereotypes -- works against this goal. JKR's use of sterotypes allows us to mentally flesh out many characters based on a brief description -- we *know* McGonagall because we know her type. Unfortunately, these types are drawn from our own society which has traditionally limited women to a few roles. As a result, if we were limited to the major characters we would find it hard to believe that there have been an equal number of female ministers of magic. Even Harry, though fleshed out in his own very unique way, is drawn from the stereotype hero's journey; JKR has said Harry sprung into being in her imagination as a male character. That's not surprising, given JKR's own background. Female characters are not typically the drivers of the action in a journey like this. (I'll give her credit for giving Hermione such a prominent role. Nevertheless, even she is drawn from the stereotype of the young girl who relies on book-learning as a crutch -- perhaps because society is conditioned to doubt her true talent, but it's still a stereotype.) Jeremiah: However, I still see Ginny as being complex. She seems so sweet on the surface and then you find out she's very devious and ingenious. I'm sure Hermione wouldn't have Ginny as a friend if Ginny was boring and trite. Debbie: One person's interior vs. exterior is another person's personality transplant. In CoS Ginny played the damsel in distress. Truthfully, I find it hard to see HBP Ginny as the same character. Yet her narrative function in both is very one-dimentional: she is Harry's love interest (and she got to be a plot device). > >>Jeremiah: > I'm not going to do the "boys vs. girls" thing, but I want to talk > a bit about the ladies you'd mentioned as being one-dimensional, > > I don't see Molly Weasley as one-dimensional. Not at all. I see her > as extremely complex as a mother-figure. > Betsy Hp: Is she really complex though? I mean, Molly is the "harried mom" complete with a total inability to get the "real point" (on going war, etc.) and a tendency to see her children as cogs in her household machine rather than people in and of their own right. I see JKR milking Molly for comedy. I don't see her giving Molly any sort of depth. Debbie: If McGonagall is Exhibit A, Molly is Exhibit B in my argument. She is a stereotypical harried mom. It takes a lot of work to manage a houseful of kids, and to do it with humor. Stay-at-home moms have their hands full taking care of the here and now, and often don't have time for serious reflection. Yet their ability to juggle challenging kids and a home gives them plenty of complexity. I think Molly is very complex. I just wish there were female witches with families *and* a career. Our best example is Mrs. Granger, a Muggle dentist who hardly qualifies as an exemplar of gender equity in the WW. There's also Marietta's mom, though I've always pictured her in a very subordinate job where she could be intimidated. Or, if we can't have a female character with a family and a career, I would definitely settle for a compelling backstory. Even better, we need at least one adult female who is, as Julie so aptly put it: "complex and multilayered, shaped by their often painful pasts, given to questionable and conflicting decisions and actions." As Lily is dead, it looks like we're pinning our hopes on McGonagall. Debbie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 6 02:02:42 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 21:02:42 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... References: <948bbb470702051407u6e19bd19yef49689edb4736a2@mail.gmail.com> <948bbb470702051644k1f2a75d3k1861251db0fdaa02@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <003101c74992$e6e88740$31ba400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164657 Jeremiah: I don't see the "cogs in her household machine" issue. If you're in afamily as large as the Weasleys and the table needs to be set for dinnerthen you're going to delegate. If you have a bunch of kids that have to getoff to school then you're going to bark and nudge. a lot. And I am someonewho believes that kids aren't "little adults" and need to be steered a bunchas kids. Teen-agers aren't adults and don't behave like adults, either. Ican see Phineus Nigellu's perspectives but he's a Negative-Nancy and has a bad attitude. But Molly has moment where she yells at Fred and Georgebefore the Quidditch World Cup and then when they return safe and sound she regrets her words of anger. Magpie: Right. She's a stock type. She yells at the kids but something happening to her is her biggest fear. She's a very familiar mother character--not exactly complex. Though neither are the male characters, exactly. JKR is great at creating characters around a conflict, so most of the characters do have that. The men just usually are more central to the plot and have conflicts that matter in that way. Jeremiah: I think some modern forms of Feminism look at the mother/home-makerrole as deplorable but I don't see how JKR disagrees with me. I think wehave a difference of interpretation. Magpie: I don't think JKR's much taking a stand on being a housewife. I think Molly's just a character who's defined by being home/family/mother to everyone. She does lots of domestic stuff and mothers people. You can be that type and be feminist or not feminist, but I think the Weasley is supposed to have an old-fashioned feel to it. Their own attitudes about women are pretty old-fashioned with the whole "Scarlet Woman" idea (which of course sets Ginny up to be the spunky one). Though part of Molly's character is also that she lives through the successes of others. She doesn't have personal ambition so much as ambition for those she takes care of. She has no word about herself in the Slug Club but has definite thoughts about why Arthur should have been in, and how he should be promoted and all that. Whether one considers that attitude anti-feminist is probably subjective, but it's a very familiar type and was before women had the vote. Jeremiah: But I still ask, what would it have taken to get her to do that? AndI do think it's sad that JKR has address it yet. Magpie: But why would she have to address it, especially given Bellatrix's background? As a DE there's no reason to think we need to get her backstory to that extent any more than we'll get Lucius'. Jeremiah :Hot for LV? Well, maybe. (yuck) Maybe. LOL. Maybe she's had the desire tofeel like "one of the boys" and scrambles at scraps to prove herself. She boasts in ways that reflect LV's own boastful lies. She is a vocal supporterwith extremely high defenses and must have deep, deep fears about herself and her family to be that boisterous and eager to be cruel. Something isdefinitely stinky about her past. (hee hee. Lady Macbeth. ) Magpie: Hasn't she made it clear she's hot for LV? She worships the man and brags about being his most loyal supporter. What you're suggesting here is the kind of thing that's great for fanfic, but the books haven't suggested anything about Bellatrix having these motives. There's nothing about her wanting to be in a boys club or needing to do anything she's done to do that. All we've seen is that she really loves LV. --------------------------------------------------- > >>Jeremiah: > And Umbridge... She is career-motivated. She has a very dark and > sinister side to her. > Betsy Hp: But, but! Umbridge doesn't have any *other* side! She's dark and sinister, and that's about it. I mean, she's a great villain (as is Bellatrix for that matter). Absolutely wonderful to hiss at as she stalks across the stage twirling her mustache, but we don't have any hints of deeper things going on. Jeremiah: I think Umbridge does. I think she has a frilly soft side deep within but since she is so toad-like she cannot convince others to see her that way. She has adopted the cruelty and ridicule that stems from her "ugliness" (and the external perception of her physicality) and uses it to gain her own power. IMO she has "learned" to be cruel in the cruelest ways. Sure, I've extrapolated a bit, but I remember how I used to be as a kids, fat, geeky. I was treated cruelly and I remember the moment when I had the choice to be like the others who treaded me with hatred or to be compassionate and loving. Umbridge hasn't learned that you can get more bees with honey than with vinegar. She's quite tragic to me. Magpie: You haven't extrapolated a bit, you've extrapolated a lot--unless you can show me the actual canon for these things instead of just taking what we have of Umbridge and writing your own backstory for her. > >>Jeremiah: > Ginny is very complicated. > Betsy Hp: Only if there's something up with her in HBP. Otherwise she's Harry's sugar and a bit of recess before his battle with the big bad. Oh, and his baby-making machine for the wonderful epilogue. However, if it turns out that her utterly horrid behavior in HBP really *was* horrid behavior and not short-hand for "spunky girl!" than yes, I'll grant you Ginny's complexity. At this point though, it's still an open question. And Ginny is still not an adult. Betsy Hp --------------------------------------------- Jeremiah: You got me there, too. However, I still see Ginny as being complex. She seems so sweeton the surface and then you find out she's very devious and ingenious. I'msure Hermione wouldn't have Ginny as a friend if Ginny was boring and trite.Ginny has learned a lot from Fred and George. She's had Bill and Charlie to look up to because, IMO I don't think they look at her as a "girl" but justas a younger sibling. Mollie never scolds her for not being "lady-like" and, yet, Ginny has wonderful manners and is a well behaved person. Ok, she liketo make-out with lots of boys. big deal. So do I. LOL. But I don't think she's very one-dimensional. Magpie: She doesn't seem sweet on the surface to me. Most every line she has in HBP is an insult. The "real" Ginny of OotP and HBP (who seems a blatantly different character than the one who came before, but we're supposed to think she was always like this and it was just hidden from us) is highlighted as not having wonderful manners or being particularly well-behaved. She's not necessarily boring or trite, but I think she's less complex than a lot of male and female characters. Jeremiah: Let us not forget Fleur. I thought she was some trite-boring-mushy-spoiled chick who should be shot between the eyes to save her from the misery of her own life and then. Blam! She's in for the long haul. She love someone forwhat is within. There is a reason she was picked to be a tri-wizard champion and I'm sure it will come into play during DH. (Honestly, did anyone elsethink she was going to still want bill after he was mauled? I didn't'). Magpie: I can't say I thought she was any of those things--that seemed clearly about the cattiness of Ginny and Hermione and I liked her. But still, she's about as complex as most characters. She's a type, but with a twist or conflict. I like her fine as a character, but she's pretty unimportant. Jeremiah: Now, what I whole-heartedly agree to is this: The story line is verymale-centric. Harry, Sirius, Lupin, James, Wormtail, Voldemort, Dumbledore, Malfoy. .we can tell the story using only these characters. I do believethat Ron and Hermione are interesting but could be written out. So, I see how the feminist-perspective could be riled (and I agree that there needs tobe more female influence in the plot) but when the author is a woman. asingle parent who has worked hard to make this story happen. as well as herown life. then I don't think it holds much water, to be honest. Magpie: Right--I think that's the more relevent thing. I don't think JKR needs to write to set quota of characters where there must be X important girls and women or she chooses characters' genders based on some agenda. But I don't think it's out of line for people to see things that they think are saying sexist things if they do. When asked about whether Lily hated James in the Pensieve (which I thought clearly she didn't) JKR said, "She's a woman. You know what we're like" or something liek that--and that's the kind of attitude that I do see permeating the books when it comes to the female characters. There's some very clear patterns in the way romances work and how girls are judged that if they don't reflect anything about politics might still say something about how the author thinks about her own sex. Or it just says she likes types that aren't always feminist. (When she is being feminist she seems self-consciously so, with Hermione and Ginny.) Basically, I think we are probably all using different definitions of "complex" because JKR's strength is she creates great, vibrant characters that jump off the page easily--but she's not writing a character piece. Nobody is really "complex" because if they were the story wouldn't work the way it does. They have to be interesting chess pieces (there's also very little character "development" which means the characters actually change--part of the appeal is their familiarity). So it's not a problem with the female characters that they're not complex, imo, because they share that with everybody. But that can be a different issue from whether one finds a particular female type used feminist. -m From cdayr at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 02:23:11 2007 From: cdayr at yahoo.com (cdayr) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 02:23:11 -0000 Subject: And in the end...SS/PS Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164658 "Don' you worry Harry Everyone starts at the beginning at Hogwart's " (US Ed. pg.86) Greetings! As I'm sure many of you have been, I have been re-reading the series again in advanced final preparation to Know Everything on July 21. Although I would happily talk about Snape, and Snape alone until the last moment , I had an idea to try and mix it up a bit. I would like to propose that once a month (this being the first of 6 months before the big day) we begin a thread focusing on one particular book, starting at the beginning and working through to HBP by July. This "zoom in" look at each book would focus on the question, "What in this book will be important to the end?" I will be happy to start this thread each month, but would also be glad to accept volunteers who might want to start the discussion in any given month. If you would like to volunteer, just e-mail me off-list at cdayr at yahoo.com and I will make a schedule. I have been focusing my attentions on PS/SS for the last week or two, and have compiled these items that I believe (and I know many of you believe) may be essential to the finale. I've tried to come up with a few that have not been heavily discussed lately, and tried not to dwell too heavily on recently discussed topics (with moderate success). In responding to this thread, I hope you will add to this list (I know my list is only skimming the surface), tell me where I'm totally off track, and break off into new threads, maybe even some that are not about Snape. Or are. So let's go: PS/SS! Just to change it up, I'll start with a reference I'm interested in at the very end of PS/SS (all references are the U.S. Paperback Ed): 1. "Sent owls off ter all yer parents' old school friends," (pg. 304) says Hagrid, as he gives Harry the photo album at the end of the book. This seems to be a reference to a number of old friends that Hagrid has easy access to. Do we know any of these old friends (aside from Lupin, the only one we know for sure)? Is this the Order, or are there further relationships between characters we know and the Potters that will be revealed in DH? (assuming JKR is truthful that no new major characters are to come.) Will Harry's ability to pull people together also include his parents' friends? 2. Hagrid is the Keeper of the Keys (pg. 48). Although this has been discussed ad nauseum in the past, I still believe that in this title lies the fact that Hagrid is a "key" to the ending of the books and the defeat of Voldemort. How, you ask? Hmm a piece of information he has, something he witnessed, something from Tom's Hogwart's years that he knows, something about Snape? What do you think? 3. "Dunno if he had enough human left in him to die." (Hagrid, pg. 57) Hmm, awfully close to horcruxes during the very first discussion of Voldy! This statement is so close to what we finally learn to be true 6 books later, I wonder is this just the writing of a woman who was unsure any more books in the series would be published? Or does Hagrid know more than he lets on? Or is it common knowledge that VM is less than human or changed? Seems like a very accurate statement from Hagrid at this point. I'm keeping my eye on Hagrid. 4. "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." (pg. 80) The alienation of the Slytherin crowd is a huge theme, started here in SS/PS, which I believe will hold a key to the resolution of the series as well. As someone (sorry I forget who) said recently, this statement is both extremely biased (poor Harry never stands a chance of thinking fairly about the Slytherins- he didn't even make it through his first wizardish day without being told that Slytherins are no good) it is also just untrue (Peter Pettigrew, anyone? And at the time, everyone thought Sirius was a bad as they come- oops, sorry, wrong book, getting ahead of myself). How do all of our "good" characters get to justify this bias? How does JKR? How does this bias self-perpetuate, as in Draco's desire to be in Slytherin? What will break this down (as I believe it must be broken in the end)? 5. Ollivander's eyes, his creepy glassy eyes really stuck out to me as I was reading today. "Wide, pale eyes, shining like moons Harry wished he would blink. Those silvery eyes were a bit creepy Harry could see himself reflected in those misty eyes." (pgs. 82-83) I am of the belief that Ollivander is not dead, but captive or fled to Voldemort, and will be important in DH. This description of him is far more sinister than I remember, and reads to me as someone hiding things- similar to Snape's glittering eyes. Will Ollivander be able to alter VM's wand to operate successfully against Harry? What else might a sinister Ollivander do to alter the possible final outcome of the books? Where is he? 6. Is Quidditch included in the book just for fun, house rivalry, and reader interest? Is there anything about Quidditch in this first book in particular that adds to the overall mystery and fight with VM? Oh, Quidditch 7. Alright, a lovely Snape moment that becomes more beautiful with our wizened HBP eyes: " Snape and Filch were inside, alone. Snape was holding his robe above his knees. One of his legs was bloody and mangled Harry tried to shut the door quietly, but? "POTTER!" Snape's face was twisted with fury as he dropped his robes quickly to hide his leg .the expression on Snape's face when Harry had seen his leg wasn't easy to forget." (pgs. 182-183) The parallels with the "levicorpus" incident in the pensieve are just glaring to me in this scene (sensitive about his legs, our Severus). And we've seen the Snape face-of-fury quite a bit now, but here is our first glimpse. I see his outbursts of fury coming at points when he may appear weak or feels out of control. What sets him off in this scene so dramatically? There is no reason, really, to be furious with Harry here, within the context of the story- all Harry has seen is that his leg is injured. Is it truly that he is thrown back in time to his "worst memory" by having a Potter see his bare legs? Or in the big picture, where does Snape's fury come from? 8. Norbert must come back, right? I mean really, he's a Chekhov's gun, isn't he? Have to bring him back to resolve the act one introduction. Just a thought. 9. "Your father left this in my possession before he died." (pg. 202) So, I guess we should all still be thinking about why James left the Invisibility Cloak with DD, since JKR says we should. I have read so many ideas about this over time: Regulus or someone else needed it to go into hiding, someone (apparently not Snape) was under it at GH, etc. Well, any further thoughts on the ol' cloak? Also, the fact that this is supposedly important does give me hope that JKR is planning to tell us quite a bit about the events leading up to the Potters' deaths- if we will know why James left the cloak, then hopefully we will know even more about what he was up to back then. 10. I was thinking about the recent thread about Snape being fixated the past, or being past- oriented when reading the Mirror of Erised chapter again. While Harry is able to break free of the hold his past might have on him in the mirror, in some ways Snape cannot break away from the past. It seems Snape's life is very much dictated by fixation on the past (marauders in particular), and that DD's remark, "It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live," might apply to Snape, except it would be "dwell on the past." Of course, it also speaks volumes to what Harry failed to learn in time for OotP (dreams, Harry! geez ) 11. My bulleted list of other SS/PS topics that I believe will play in the end: *Grindelwald? *Centaurs? *"Snape was trying to *save* me?" (Harry, pg.289) *" your mother needn't have died " (Quirrell, pg. 294) *"Always use the proper names for things." (DD, pg. 298) (I don't know, every witch and wizard says "Voldemort" at the same instant, and PooF! Yay! (Uh oh, better wrap up, I'm getting tired.)) 12. Finally, The Biggie (and go over it again or don't, we just can't ignore it in this type of list, if you ask me): The missing 24 hours. I know we have gone over it and over it, but anyway: How does the entire wizarding world know about VM's defeat by the morning of that first Tuesday? Who was able to send the first owls out that fast? Where were Hagrid and Harry all day? Why is McGonagall waiting all day at 4 Privet Drive? She must assume that it is possible that DD and Harry might show up at any time during the day, so this deepens the mystery of Where-is-Hagrid-All- Day? When did she see Hagrid? Who was at GH and what the heck happened? If this isn't essential to the end, I'll eat my hat. And it is a big, woolen hat. Well, that should send us off in 20 directions at once...There is much more in that slim volume, PS/SS, that will be important In The End, but those are my thoughts/questions to you all for now Hope this sparks some discussion, let me know if you would like to be the writer for a starter "And in the end " post for any of the next books by e-mailing me off-list, and let's start up the ramp to July 21st. Yee! Celia (aka CDR) From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue Feb 6 02:25:01 2007 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 18:25:01 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape oriented to the past? WAS: Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164659 Pippin: Of course I am talking about DDM!Snape. But you know that I did say I hoped there would be a new understanding between them. I'm guessing that once Harry understands why Snape hated him, he will forgive Snape for it, and that once Snape understands what really happened with the prank he will no longer have such a grudge against James. As for Snape betraying the Potters, I think Snape has redeemed himself for that already, and Harry needs to realize that too. Sherry: Harry may indeed have to learn to forgive Snape--a very revolting thought to me personally--but seriously, can Harry ever truly forgive and trust or want to be friends, colleagues or whatever with the person who told Voldemort the prophecy and so brought about the death of his parents and the life he's had? I'd think that no matter how hard he worked at forgiveness and understanding, he could not forget that, and it would affect any future dealings with Snape. He has no reason to *like* Snape after all. Forgiving does not mean forgetting, contrary to what many old movies or love songs may say. I could never personally forget the deeds of the person who helped bring about my parents deaths--if that had happened to me--and I know it would be a very difficult task to learn to understand and to forgive. I don't know if that makes sense, but for us, we don't know the potters, they aren't a part of our story, but they were Harry's parents. Hmmm, I don't think I am saying this well, but I think it would be unrealistic for Harry to learn to trust and willingly be around Snape, beyond a certain level. A sort of professional forgiveness, as opposed to a deep down in your gut kind of one. obviously, it was Wormtail who did the actual betraying, and if the prophecy is all Snape is guilty of it's not as immediate and personal as what Wormtail did. But it did set the whole terrible chain of events in motion. if Snape is indeed a DDM, then he must regret that with his whole being. Sherry From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 03:02:09 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 03:02:09 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: <003101c74992$e6e88740$31ba400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164660 Magpie: > Right--I think that's the more relevent thing. I don't think JKR needs to > write to set quota of characters where there must be X important girls and > women or she chooses characters' genders based on some agenda. But I don't > think it's out of line for people to see things that they think are saying > sexist things if they do. Alla: HA! As it often happens, your post may be the best moment to ask the question I have after following this thread, because you sort of answered it for me. See, of course I do not think that it is out of line to call JKR writing sexist or call her many other things, no question about it. I almost typed that she is not a real poster, which would have been a different story, but you get the gist, hehe. But I am of the firm agreement with the first sentence in your quote and therefore my question is - why? Not to you, because as I said I think we are pretty close on this ( or maybe not) but in general. Why do we need the strong female character just for the sake of having one? What if JKR felt that good story could be written **only** with the male characters in it? Does she **owe** us the presence of female characters in the story? I would say not at all. Just as if she wished to write a story about women only, as long as it is good story, IMO it is all that counts. Like as lots people know I want certain fate for Snape. Since you definitely know it and I just mentioned it today, I won't But if my wish does not come true, does it mean that the story become bad? And vice versa is true as well IMO. One of my favorite book in my childhood and teens was " The mysterious Island" by Jules Verne, where as we all know there are no women, only couple of them are mentioned in brief narrative from connected book. Do I care that there are no women in the story? Um, **not at all**, because the story is fascinating to me. Oh, and just in case I am most definitely a woman in her early thirties. Again, do not get me wrong, I would love to know more about Minerva, I definitely agree that she is on supporting roles, but I would love to know more about her not because she is a woman, but because I grew to care about her as character. I don't know, I just find myself confused over this. From juli17 at aol.com Tue Feb 6 03:27:32 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 03:27:32 -0000 Subject: Snape oriented to the past? WAS: Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164661 > > Sherry: > > Harry may indeed have to learn to forgive Snape--a very revolting thought to > me personally--but seriously, can Harry ever truly forgive and trust or want > to be friends, colleagues or whatever with the person who told Voldemort the > prophecy and so brought about the death of his parents and the life he's > had? I'd think that no matter how hard he worked at forgiveness and > understanding, he could not forget that, and it would affect any future > dealings with Snape. He has no reason to *like* Snape after all. Forgiving > does not mean forgetting, contrary to what many old movies or love songs may > say. I could never personally forget the deeds of the person who helped > bring about my parents deaths--if that had happened to me--and I know it > would be a very difficult task to learn to understand and to forgive. I > don't know if that makes sense, but for us, we don't know the potters, they > aren't a part of our story, but they were Harry's parents. Hmmm, I don't > think I am saying this well, but I think it would be unrealistic for Harry > to learn to trust and willingly be around Snape, beyond a certain level. A > sort of professional forgiveness, as opposed to a deep down in your gut kind > of one. obviously, it was Wormtail who did the actual betraying, and if the > prophecy is all Snape is guilty of it's not as immediate and personal as > what Wormtail did. But it did set the whole terrible chain of events in > motion. if Snape is indeed a DDM, then he must regret that with his whole > being. Julie: There is another facet of Snape's sin against the Potters, which is that Snape tried his best to rectify his bad deed (according to Dumbledore anyway). If this is true, if Snape did everything he possibly could to *stop* Voldemort from using the prophecy against the Potters, then this is something Harry could (and perhaps should) consider when deciding whether to forgive Snape. That Snape tried to undo his betrayal does not completely erase that betrayal, but it is part of the equation. The Potters were in danger because of Snape's actions, but they were also safe because of his (subsequent) actions. That is, until they were betrayed much more directly and completely by Peter Pettigrew. It is a complicated tangle, trying to figure out just how much blame should be Snape's, along with just how much credit he should receive for his later attempt to repair the damage. I'm sure among ourselves, decent folks all of us, our varying backgrounds and experiences would have each of us willing or able to forgive a little or a lot. I actually consider Harry able to forgive a lot in most circumstances. Only time, and what it reveals about the "real" Snape we and Harry have yet to meet, will tell how much Harry can forgive Snape, and whether (should they both live) they can have any civil interaction with each other in the future. Julie, assuming DDM!Snape as always ;-) From kking0731 at gmail.com Tue Feb 6 03:35:59 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 03:35:59 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164662 Jen snipped: Maybe Harry couldn't open the door yet because he hadn't overcome all the barriers to accessing his power in OOTP? I'd find that a compelling twist. I believe Lily worked at the DOM and studied that force and while she didn't plan her sacrifice, the combination of having the same power as Harry and her almost unconcious incorporation of what she studied led to her innately knowing what to do. Snow: It would make utter sense that the only persons who could have worked in the locked room would have been persons who had the same power that the room holds. I always liked the idea of Neville's mom having worked alongside of Lily (both being pregnant and due just a day from each other), Alice does show an extreme love for Neville even yet, despite her present circumstances. Jen: I completely bought Dumbledore's line about a 'force more wonderful and terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature.' Feeling love from and for another is wonderful, but watching someone you love hurting or losing love altogether does feel terribly painful. Snow: A force powerful enough to be a protection!!! It's like the mother who picks up the car from her trapped child...yes it is adrenalin but what caused the adrenalin to go beyond the natural human capacity? Jen: And someone like Voldemort who has never experienced love finds it agony. That made sense to me after hearing how babies who have never attached to a primary caregiver and experienced physical bonding with another find it difficult to accept physical expressions of love (and perhaps emotional too, my only knowledge is reading a few articles but I remembered these when learning about baby Riddle). Snow: I had read somewhere, quite awhile ago, that someone had experimented with babies to find how much human touch and verbal correspondence (or lack thereof) affected a child's growth...they found (to the poor babies detriment) that the babies suffered immensely from very early neglect to an infants growth. The babies were delayed, if not completely insufficient, in almost every aspect of development. Voldemort, being a mere infant and introduced to uncaring neglected circumstances (such as the home he was destined to, who had nothing more than caretakers with many charges) more than added to his currant inadequacies and fears. It's not a total excuse for Tom's choices, since we have seen Harry grow up in a neglectful atmosphere but Harry did have something lil Tom didn't have...and that was a loving mother for fifteen months. We have also been absent of the way in which Harry was treated by Petunia before our story started on page one. Jen: Jen: I'd say Dumbledore believed the force is what guides Harry to put other people's lives before his own and also what protects him from Voldemort. I'm pretty sure the realization that the locked room is the means to vanquish LV will be Harry's to make, once he puts together what he learned from Dumbledore about his own power and Voldemort's weakness, and when he finally learns Lily's story (regardless of whether she worked at the DOM). Snow: Exactly! Harry damn neared died in his first encounter with Voldemort's possession tactics in his first year because he wasn't strong enough at eleven years old to experience the wonderful and terrible feelings of love. It's like when you get a puppy and the puppy dies for some reason, you naturally feel upset over the puppy's departure. However when you have spent...let's say ten plus years with the dog, you are devastated by its death to the point of extreme emotion. Every aspect of Harry's life experience contributes to this power of love he is said to be so filled with. Harry has never recognized that he loves so deeply that he reacts without thought and question to his `own' survival. Harry only recognizes, after the fact, that he had done so without regard to `others' safety. Harry cares for all persons involved and yet he beats himself up for what `could' have happened to them rather than what he saved them from. Harry never takes credit for what he does do...and more often than not, none is given. Even when Pettigrew was made to be the spy, Harry did not seek revenge on him, but more so protection for those who he quickly believed he recognized as innocents. Right or wrong of who was innocent, Harry made a decision quickly from the heart and it was not to kill or to have his father's best buds be killers (and that was way before Harry knew that killing would split the soul). Jen: Aw, that strikes me as a sad but true thought. I'm assuming the gleam has to do with Harry's blood weakening Voldemort in some way he overlooked (as usual since he doesn't know love), but it's the same difference if both the power in the room and the blood protection running in Harry's veins are love. Snow: Actually I think Dumbledore's hesitation on that matter was answered in OOP. Voldemort was able to physically attack Harry and enter, or attempt possession, but Voldemort obviously couldn't withstand the unexpected searing pain of love. Dumbledore knew that Voldemort made himself susceptible to the power of love when he used Harry's blood, Dumbledore also understood that Harry would have to expel Voldemort (or possibly not, that was Dumbledore's grimace) with that power. It was all up to the power of love in the end...and it worked. Of course, Harry very freshly experienced the loss he had the night of Voldemort's attempt to possess Harry; I'm not so sure that was sheer coincidence. Jen snipped: Either way, I think the Deathly Hallows could be bookends for the series, referring in the beginning to the All Hallow's Eve when the Potters died, and in the end to the holy/sacred force in the locked room where Voldemort is finally vanquished, and Harry...don't know but hope it's the place where he loses the soul piece connecting him to LV (if he has one) and is finally able to really live. Snow: Oh Jen, I was with you up to this point...are you not a Non `crux fan? Harry-has-Voldy-soul-but-not-as-an-official-`Crux. The rules change with a living thing that can think for itself. It's highly frowned upon to make a creature with a soul a Horcrux; none of the previous Horcrux rules apply, especially when you don't glue the soul bit to its container with a bit of the spell required. Great thoughts, Jen Snow- who would also like to thank Eggplant for bringing up the subject matter From jmmears at comcast.net Tue Feb 6 04:16:44 2007 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 04:16:44 -0000 Subject: "Flying" Hagrid and "Home Stretch" reread In-Reply-To: <519924837.20070204213752@mindspring.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164663 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > > Today is Day 5 in my reread, and in PS/SS Ch. 5, "Diagon Alley", I > found something odd -- As they leave for London, Hagrid explains > to Harry that he "flew" to the Rock. But how?? There's no sign of > Buckbeak, and I'm sure somewhere Hagrid says he's too big to mount a > broom. So what does he mean?? Is it possible that there's a > Thestral there that Harry of course doesn't see? Or did Hagrid simply > apparate to the Rock (since he seems to disapparate at the end of the > chapter)? > > Any thoughts? Hi David; you've driven me out of lurkdom to post one of my personal favorite (pointless) theories. I've always liked to think that when Hagrid replied to Harry's asking how he got to the Rock, Harry thinks he says "Flew" but in fact he said, "Floo". Of course this requires that there be another fireplace on the tiny island, but canon doesn't entirely rule this out, does it? Anyway, I like to think that this episode is one of JKR's sly little jokes, purely for her own enjoyment (well, and mine :-D). Jo S., who doesn't think that this is one of the questions likely to be answered in DH. From kking0731 at gmail.com Tue Feb 6 04:18:31 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 04:18:31 -0000 Subject: Positions in Book 7 Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164664 Pippin snipped: She has a number of staff positions to fill, not only DADA but Transfiguration, Head of Gryffindor, and Deputy Head. Any guesses whom she might pick, considering that JKR says we've met all the important characters? Snow: Not to mention Potions which is shaky ground considering Dumbledore is gone and not even Dumbledore could secure the position with Slughorn the first time round without Harry. To get on to the dilemma at hand, I would have to say that Tonks would be next in line for transfiguration, given her talents. Dada, however, would be crucial since we are well aware of its downfall. Next in line for Headmaster would be even harder than DaDa to forcast! And Head of Gryffindor may be harder yet! Extremely interesting questions, makes you almost wonder if there would be a Hogwarts :) Snow From juli17 at aol.com Tue Feb 6 04:24:24 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 04:24:24 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164665 Alla wrote: > > Why do we need the strong female character just for the sake of > having one? What if JKR felt that good story could be written > **only** with the male characters in it? Does she **owe** us the > presence of female characters in the story? I would say not at all. > Just as if she wished to write a story about women only, as long as > it is good story, IMO it is all that counts. Julie: I never said nor think that JKR "owes" us well-developed female characters, I just pointed out that the male characters are for the most part more well-developed and multi-layered than the female characters (especially the adult ones). I also noted that perhaps JKR is more comfortable writing the male adults, at least in the context of this story. You are right that it is her choice, and for whatever reason it is the male characters like Snape, Sirius and Lupin that sparked her interest the most (in terms of plot involvement and back stories). I did note that I was disappointed not to see McGonagall or one of the other female adults more fleshed out. That's because they are the ones that are least fleshed out :-) OTOH, if that fleshing out took any page time away from Snape... (Just kidding!) Alla: > One of my favorite book in my childhood and teens was " The > mysterious Island" by Jules Verne, where as we all know there are no > women, only couple of them are mentioned in brief narrative from > connected book. Do I care that there are no women in the story? Um, > **not at all**, because the story is fascinating to me. > > Oh, and just in case I am most definitely a woman in her early > thirties. Julie: I admit I haven't read The Mysterious Island, but many novels that featured male characters predominantly--Moby Dick, for instance--did so because historically it was a man's world, at least in novels about seafaring, war, the American West, etc. Women didn't have much of a role in those parts of society. But JKR's WW is an equal opportunity world. And she's writing about the whole society, rather than about a couple of characters in an isolated setting (Okay, that's Robinson Crusoe!). While she's under no obligation to portray male and female characters in an equally dynamic manner, I can see why some fans would question why she has chosen not to do so. (Up to this point, anyway.) Alla: > Again, do not get me wrong, I would love to know more about Minerva, > I definitely agree that she is on supporting roles, but I would love > to know more about her not because she is a woman, but because I > grew to care about her as character. > > I don't know, I just find myself confused over this. Julie: Again, it's more curiosity for me about why JKR made the choices she did. I do believe she has every right to focus more thought and time on characters she likes to write best without being labeled sexist for it. It doesn't stop me from wanting more for the less developed characters however ;-) Julie From jmrazo at hotmail.com Tue Feb 6 04:41:26 2007 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 04:41:26 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164666 > > > >>Jeremiah: > > Ginny is very complicated. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Only if there's something up with her in HBP. Otherwise she's > Harry's sugar and a bit of recess before his battle with the big > bad. Oh, and his baby-making machine for the wonderful epilogue. > > However, if it turns out that her utterly horrid behavior in HBP > really *was* horrid behavior and not short-hand for "spunky girl!" > than yes, I'll grant you Ginny's complexity. At this point though, > it's still an open question. And Ginny is still not an adult. > > Betsy Hp Betsy, I agree with you post completely!(I don't feel right, quick, say something nice about Snape or Draco) But I would go even a step further. This is a story about a boy without a father, and ultimately, how Harry deals with his unresolved father and the other men in his life is far more important than how he deals with the women in his life. At least in my opinion. And I have made the point before, but I'll make it again. rather than worry about the women, I worry about what I think is the very real lack of strong male/father characters in the story. We have Arthur, who has a spine consisting of three parts jello and one part spaghetti. We have Lupin, who wouldn't know a strong decision if it bit him in the behind during a full moon. We have Sirius, who was brave, and strong and good. Right until he inexplicably went insane in the fifth book after being fine in the fourth. We have Snape, who is still an issue laden thirteen year old on the inside. We have James, the legendary Father who turns out to be an enormous ass, despite the awe most people hold him in (great model for fathers right there). We have Lucius, the mighty pureblood wizard with the aim of storm trooper. We have Voldemort, the evil wizard so scary people stutter through this nickname but wouldn't last five minutes against someone who'd read the evil overlord handbook. We have Dumbledore, the great light side wizard who couldn't make a plan, run a war, run a school, or protect a child's interests to save his life. So I tell, for those worried about the lack of strong female characters, I am more worried about the male characters. phoenixgod2000, who has a very low threshold to meet for characterization out of his love for Robert Howard and Edgar Rice Burroughs and is still not happy with the characterizations in HP From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 05:00:12 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 05:00:12 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164667 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > Betsy, I agree with you post completely!(I don't feel right, quick, > say something nice about Snape or Draco) But I would go even a step > further. This is a story about a boy without a father, and ultimately, > how Harry deals with his unresolved father and the other men in his > life is far more important than how he deals with the women in his > life. At least in my opinion. > > And I have made the point before, but I'll make it again. rather than > worry about the women, I worry about what I think is the very real > lack of strong male/father characters in the story. Alla: Oh, good to see you back even temporarily. Me too, me too to every word of your post. Just take a look at how Lily's sacrifice and James sacrifices are distinguished even in interview, hehe. Lily is still a Saint, etc. But I have to say though I completely agree that **all** father figures in HBP have multiple flaws, while mothers in JKR's views are not ( well, Lily and Molly anyways), I do think that men are written better - much more flawed but better. IMO of course. > Julie: > I never said nor think that JKR "owes" us well-developed female > characters, I just pointed out that the male characters are for > the most part more well-developed and multi-layered than the > female characters (especially the adult ones). Alla: And I never said that you said that, LOL. I asked a question that I had in mind based on general feeling after reading this thread. But yes, agreed that males are written better, no questions about it. Although as somebody said previously, even while she is not adult, I think Hermione is very well done. > Julie: > Again, it's more curiosity for me about why JKR made the > choices she did. I do believe she has every right to > focus more thought and time on characters she likes to > write best without being labeled sexist for it. It doesn't > stop me from wanting more for the less developed > characters however ;-) Alla: I believe that reader has an absolute right to expect the things to happen in the story and dislike the story if it does not, I am just not sure how readers unfulfilled expectations necessarily translate into bad story ( and no, you did not say that, it is a very general statement, not even just for this thread). Although reader interaction with the text sometimes does create a new story, hehe. JMO, Alla. From kjones at telus.net Tue Feb 6 05:36:17 2007 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 21:36:17 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] And in the end...SS/PS In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45C813D1.4090708@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164668 cdayr wrote: > Greetings! > As I'm sure many of you have been, I have been re-reading the series > again in advanced final preparation to Know Everything on July 21. > Although I would happily talk about Snape, and Snape alone until the > last moment , I had an idea to try and mix it up a bit. snip > So let's go: PS/SS! > Just to change it up, I'll start with a reference I'm interested in > at the very end of PS/SS (all references are the U.S. Paperback Ed): > > 1. "Sent owls off ter all yer parents' old school friends," > (pg. 304) says Hagrid, as he gives Harry the photo album at the end > of the book. This seems to be a reference to a number of old friends > that Hagrid has easy access to. Do we know any of these old friends > (aside from Lupin, the only one we know for sure)? Is this the > Order, or are there further relationships between characters we know > and the Potters that will be revealed in DH? (assuming JKR is > truthful that no new major characters are to come.) Will Harry's > ability to pull people together also include his parents' friends? > > 2. Hagrid is the Keeper of the Keys (pg. 48). Although this has > been discussed ad nauseum in the past, I still believe that in this > title lies the fact that Hagrid is a "key" to the ending of the > books and the defeat of Voldemort. How, you ask? Hmma piece of > information he has, something he witnessed, something from Tom's > Hogwart's years that he knows, something about Snape? What do you > think? KJ: I have always thought that Hagrid knows much more than what it seems. He defends Snape, although he won't meet Harry's eyes when he says that Snape doesn't hate him. He mentions three separate times that it would be madness to try to rob Gringotts, which indicates to me a knowledge of something. Perhaps DD is anticipating an attempt that Hagrid doesn't believe can happen. > 3. "Dunno if he had enough human left in him to die." (Hagrid, > pg. 57) Hmm, awfully close to horcruxes during the very first > discussion of Voldy! This statement is so close to what we finally > learn to be true 6 books later, I wonderis this just the writing of > a woman who was unsure any more books in the series would be > published? Or does Hagrid know more than he lets on? Or is it common > knowledge that VM is less than human or changed? Seems like a very > accurate statement from Hagrid at this point. I'm keeping my eye on > Hagrid. KJ: I think that Voldemort's appearance was obviously changed. Hagrid would have been involved in the prior war with Voldemort and has always been a trusted lieutenant for Dumbledore. He knows a great deal. > > 4. "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who > wasn't in Slytherin." (pg. 80) The alienation of the Slytherin crowd > is a huge theme, started here in SS/PS, which I believe will hold a > key to the resolution of the series as well. As someone (sorry I > forget who) said recently, this statement is both extremely biased > (poor Harry never stands a chance of thinking fairly about the > Slytherins- he didn't even make it through his first wizardish day > without being told that Slytherins are no good) it is also just > untrue (Peter Pettigrew, anyone? And at the time, everyone thought > Sirius was a bad as they come- oops, sorry, wrong book, getting > ahead of myself). How do all of our "good" characters get to justify > this bias? How does JKR? How does this bias self-perpetuate, as in > Draco's desire to be in Slytherin? What will break this down (as I > believe it must be broken in the end)? > > 5. Ollivander's eyes, his creepy glassy eyes really stuck out > to me as I was reading today. "Wide, pale eyes, shining like moons > Harry wished he would blink. Those silvery eyes were a bit creepy > Harry could see himself reflected in those misty eyes." (pgs. 82-83) > I am of the belief that Ollivander is not dead, but captive or fled > to Voldemort, and will be important in DH. This description of him > is far more sinister than I remember, and reads to me as someone > hiding things- similar to Snape's glittering eyes. Will Ollivander > be able to alter VM's wand to operate successfully against Harry? > What else might a sinister Ollivander do to alter the possible final > outcome of the books? Where is he? KJ: I suspect that Ollivander is in hiding at Dumbledore's request to prevent Voldemort from changing his wand. I don't think that would fit in with Dumbledore's plans. > > 6. Is Quidditch included in the book just for fun, house > rivalry, and reader interest? Is there anything about Quidditch in > this first book in particular that adds to the overall mystery and > fight with VM? Oh, Quidditch KJ: I find Quidditch hguely boring. > > 7. Alright, a lovely Snape moment that becomes more beautiful > with our wizened HBP eyes: " Snape and Filch were inside, alone. > Snape was holding his robe above his knees. One of his legs was > bloody and mangledHarry tried to shut the door quietly, but > "POTTER!" Snape's face was twisted with fury as he dropped his robes > quickly to hide his leg.the expression on Snape's face when Harry > had seen his leg wasn't easy to forget." (pgs. 182-183) The > parallels with the "levicorpus" incident in the pensieve are just > glaring to me in this scene (sensitive about his legs, our Severus). > And we've seen the Snape face-of-fury quite a bit now, but here is > our first glimpse. I see his outbursts of fury coming at points when > he may appear weak or feels out of control. What sets him off in > this scene so dramatically? There is no reason, really, to be > furious with Harry here, within the context of the story- all Harry > has seen is that his leg is injured. Is it truly that he is thrown > back in time to his "worst memory" by having a Potter see his bare > legs? Or in the big picture, where does Snape's fury come from? KJ: On re-reading this book, I see hints that Snape is very wary, almost fearful of Harry. I think that there is a suspicion that Harry may have a connection with Voldemorte, and Snape fears it. When Harry flew past him, without warning, in the Quidditch game, Snape landed "white-faced and tight-lipped." To me, this might explain some of Snape's hostility toward Harry. > > 8. Norbert must come back, right? I mean really, he's a > Chekhov's gun, isn't he? Have to bring him back to resolve the act > one introduction. Just a thought. KJ: I think that Charlie and Norbert will be back. Why else have a dragon trainer? :-) > > 9. "Your father left this in my possession before he died." > (pg. 202) So, I guess we should all still be thinking about why > James left the Invisibility Cloak with DD, since JKR says we should. > I have read so many ideas about this over time: Regulus or someone > else needed it to go into hiding, someone (apparently not Snape) was > under it at GH, etc. Well, any further thoughts on the ol' cloak? > Also, the fact that this is supposedly important does give me hope > that JKR is planning to tell us quite a bit about the events leading > up to the Potters' deaths- if we will know why James left the cloak, > then hopefully we will know even more about what he was up to back > then. KJ: I am betting that Snape was at GH, trying to warn the Potters when Voldemort arrived. JKR said that he was not hiding under the invisibility cloak, not that he wasn't there. > > 10. I was thinking about the recent thread about Snape being > fixated the past, or being past- oriented when reading the Mirror of > Erised chapter again. While Harry is able to break free of the hold > his past might have on him in the mirror, in some ways Snape cannot > break away from the past. It seems Snape's life is very much > dictated by fixation on the past (marauders in particular), and that > DD's remark, "It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live," > might apply to Snape, except it would be "dwell on the past." Of > course, it also speaks volumes to what Harry failed to learn in time > for OotP (dreams, Harry! geez) KJ: Dreams, compared to memories, are crucial in this book, I think. Harry, while awake, recalls a flash of green light and a high, cold laugh. This would indicate an old memory. Later he dreams that he is wearing a turban, and again sees a green flash of light and hears a high,cold laugh. This might tend to suggest that he is seeing Voldemort's memory of the same event. Later, again, he has several nightmares with the green flash of light and the laugh. > > 11. My bulleted list of other SS/PS topics that I believe will > play in the end: > *Grindelwald? > *Centaurs? > *"Snape was trying to *save* me?" (Harry, pg.289) KJ: We see Snape refereeing the game to keep an eye on Harry, and later in the book, Harry feels like he is running into Snape wherever he goes. Some of that might be to keep an eye on Harry, and some of it to protect Harry. > 12. Finally, The Biggie (and go over it again or don't, we just > can't ignore it in this type of list, if you ask me): The missing 24 > hours. I know we have gone over it and over it, but anyway: KJ: I would like to know as well! > > How does the entire wizarding world know about VM's defeat by the > morning of that first Tuesday? Who was able to send the first owls > out that fast? > Where were Hagrid and Harry all day? > Why is McGonagall waiting all day at 4 Privet Drive? She must assume > that it is possible that DD and Harry might show up at any time > during the day, so this deepens the mystery of Where-is-Hagrid-All- > Day? When did she see Hagrid? > Who was at GH and what the heck happened? If this isn't essential to > the end, I'll eat my hat. And it is a big, woolen hat. snip > Celia (aka CDR) KJ: Good questions Celia. From va32h at comcast.net Tue Feb 6 05:43:54 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 05:43:54 -0000 Subject: Positions in Book 7 Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164669 Pippin writes: She has a number of staff positions to fill, not only DADA but Transfiguration, Head of Gryffindor, and Deputy Head. Any guesses whom she might pick, considering that JKR says we've met all the important characters? va32h here: Assuming Hogwarts opens at all, I think enrollment would be so small that a minimal staff would be needed. McGonnagal could continue to teach Transfiguration and be Headmistress. Any of the other teachers could take the role of Deputy Head. That leaves DADA and Head of Gryffindor, which could be the same person, assuming anyone is willing to take on the Curse.(as an aside, I really hate the Curse plot twist). But perhaps an Auror like Tonks, confident in Harry's ability to defeat Voldemort and thus end the curse, would be up for it. And I don't doubt Tonks was a Gryffindor. I think we may have to add Potions to the list, as Slughorn didn't look to sure about staying on after Dumbledore died. For that, I have no clue, as we haven't seen any available character with particular Potions skill. I do think Harry will have to return to Hogwarts, but that doesn't mean it has to be open to students. The idea of the Trio skulking about a deserted Hogwarts is suitably spooky for a book called The Deathly Hallows, don't you think? va32h From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Feb 6 07:41:50 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 07:41:50 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164670 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: Eggplant: > By the way, you don't suppose JKR could be so revolutionary > as to let Voldemort win do you? No, of course not, silly question, > I apologize. Still, sometimes late at night I wonder if, ., oh never > mind. Geoff: When JKR went on record as saying that there are two character deaths in Book 7, one thought that crossed my mind was whether this included Voldemort or was his death a given? Are we expecting two of the other characters or just one? I haven't seen this being mentioned on the group but I don't read every message or I'd never have time to do anything useful. :-) Carol: > > like a young British soldier returning > > from World War II Eggplant: > Many of those noble and incredibly brave young soldiers had been > forced to do hideous things, and many of them suffered from Post > Traumatic Shock Syndrome for the rest of their lives as a result; If > Harry survives I expect he will have the same problem. We may have > seen a tiny taste of that in book 5 when Harry gets a little grumpy at > his friends and destroys Dumbledore's office. Geoff: Yes, but not every soldier had that problem. Many of them were able to re-integrate into ordinary life - perhaps not overnight - but without long-term problems. My father did. Carol: > > At any rate, I have every confidence that > > JKR can bring about a poignant, bittersweet > > ending that brings tears to all but the > > most jaded reader's eyes and yet have > > Harry survive to attend Hogwarts for a > > belated seventh year along with Ron, > > Hermione, and Neville and Ginny Eggplant: > But those are a list of characters that we readers love the most, if > they all survive what is there to cry about? I believe some or all of > the characters you mention will die. Geoff: Do I want to cry? There is enough in the real world to shed tears over. Harry has already known the loss of three characters so he hasn't been protected from loss and grief and has shed his own tears, maybe privately. A little "willing suspension of disbelief" wouldn't go amiss. From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Tue Feb 6 08:00:41 2007 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 03:00:41 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] And in the end...SS/PS In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C917DC07F687B7-E58-24B3@FWM-D31.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164671 Celia wrote: "Don' you worry Harry?Everyone starts at the beginning at Hogwart's?" (US Ed. pg.86) 1. "Sent owls off ter all yer parents' old school friends," (pg. 304) says Hagrid, as he gives Harry the photo album at the end of the book. This seems to be a reference to a number of old friends that Hagrid has easy access to. Do we know any of these old friends (aside from Lupin, the only one we know for sure)? Is this the Order, or are there further relationships between characters we know and the Potters that will be revealed in DH? (assuming JKR is truthful that no new major characters are to come.) Will Harry's ability to pull people together also include his parents' friends? Oryomai: I always found that odd. People commonly refer to Lupin as one of the last links Harry has to his parents, yet apparently there are people up and walking who even had photos. Why have none of these people attempted to contact Harry? I would think that he would at least get a few owls saying how happy they are that Harry is at Hogwarts or something like that! Celia: 2. Hagrid is the Keeper of the Keys (pg. 48). Although this has been discussed ad nauseum in the past, I still believe that in this title lies the fact that Hagrid is a "key" to the ending of the books and the defeat of Voldemort. How, you ask? Hmm?a piece of information he has, something he witnessed, something from Tom's Hogwart's years that he knows, something about Snape? What do you think? Oryomai: I used to think it was more of a janitorial position, but then I remembered Filch. He already was the key to bringing Harry back to Hogwarts, thus ensuring that everything Harry's done actually happened. Since Hagrid never left Hogwarts, he would have been around while our dear friend Tom was asking Slughorn about the Horcruxes. Maybe Hagrid knows what one of the Horcruxes is! He doesn't consciously know that it is a Horcrux, but maybe he remembers seeing Tom take/hide something. Celia: 3. "Dunno if he had enough human left in him to die." (Hagrid, pg. 57) Hmm, awfully close to horcruxes during the very first discussion of Voldy! This statement is so close to what we finally learn to be true 6 books later, I wonder?is this just the writing of a woman who was unsure any more books in the series would be published? Or does Hagrid know more than he lets on? Or is it common knowledge that VM is less than human or changed? Seems like a very accurate statement from Hagrid at this point. I'm keeping my eye on Hagrid. Oryomai: I don't know if Hagrid knows anything...I never put that much stock in him until the recent discussions about his reaction to Severus "killing" DD. I don't think anyone knew LV had changed, since very few knew that he was Tom. If Hagrid knew that Tom was LV, he would've mentioned it by now (he's not so good at the secret thing). I think that it was just Hagrid saying how truly evil LV was. He had done so many terrible things that he was not even considered human anymore. Celia: 4. "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." (pg. 80) The alienation of the Slytherin crowd is a huge theme, started here in SS/PS, which I believe will hold a key to the resolution of the series as well. As someone (sorry I forget who) said recently, this statement is both extremely biased (poor Harry never stands a chance of thinking fairly about the Slytherins- he didn't even make it through his first wizardish day without being told that Slytherins are no good) it is also just untrue (Peter Pettigrew, anyone? And at the time, everyone thought Sirius was a bad as they come- oops, sorry, wrong book, getting ahead of myself). How do all of our "good" characters get to justify this bias? How does JKR? How does this bias self-perpetuate, as in Draco's desire to be in Slytherin? What will break this down (as I believe it must be broken in the end)? Oryomai: It's a sweeping generalization. "All" the witches and wizards in Slytherins are bad just as "all" the atheists want to get rid of every religious reference in the world (I'm an atheist, so I felt okay picking on myself for an example!) That's another reason why I think Severus has to be good(ish) in the end. She does so well with breaking all these prejudices, and we haven't had a good Slytherin yet. Draco's desire to be in Slytherin stem (IMO) from his family. He sees how well his family has done, and he credits being a Slyth to alot of that. I think that he has a Slytherin pride the same way that the Weasleys have a Gryffindor pride. As for DD, I've said it before and I'll say it again: the Leaving Feast of Harry's first year really set a standard. DD showed his total and complete favoring of the Gryffindors, and totally shot down Slytherin. This leaves everyone who was in Slytherin with the hatred of the Gryffindors for this, and it makes them think that DD favors Gryffindors over them. They pass this down to the new first years, until the Slytherins become what we see them as: a group of people who are bound together because they think everyone else is against them. Celia: 6. Is Quidditch included in the book just for fun, house rivalry, and reader interest? Is there anything about Quidditch in this first book in particular that adds to the overall mystery and fight with VM? Oh, Quidditch? Oryomai: I always thought that Quidditch was in the books because it's Harry's one chance to have something normal in his life. He's the Boy Who Lived, he's been continually fighting LV and his followers since the age of 11, but he can play a sport and have fun just like all his classmates. Celia: 7. Alright, a lovely Snape moment that becomes more beautiful with our wizened HBP eyes: " Snape and Filch were inside, alone. Snape was holding his robe above his knees. One of his legs was bloody and mangled?Harry tried to shut the door quietly, but? "POTTER!" Snape's face was twisted with fury as he dropped his robes quickly to hide his leg?.the expression on Snape's face when Harry had seen his leg wasn't easy to forget." (pgs. 182-183) The parallels with the "levicorpus" incident in the pensieve are just glaring to me in this scene (sensitive about his legs, our Severus). And we've seen the Snape face-of-fury quite a bit now, but here is our first glimpse. I see his outbursts of fury coming at points when he may appear weak or feels out of control. What sets him off in this scene so dramatically? There is no reason, really, to be furious with Harry here, within the context of the story- all Harry has seen is that his leg is injured. Is it truly that he is thrown back in time to his "worst memory" by having a Potter see his bare legs? Or in the big picture, where does Snape's fury come from? Oryomai: Harry was kinda eavesdropping. Severus, of all people, knows that good generally does not come from hearing parts of conversations! I don't think it's anything about the Pensieve scene...I think he just doesn't like other people thinking that he is weak, and this is definitely showing weakness. Celia: 10. I was thinking about the recent thread about Snape being fixated the past, or being past- oriented when reading the Mirror of Erised chapter again. While Harry is able to break free of the hold his past might have on him in the mirror, in some ways Snape cannot break away from the past. It seems Snape's life is very much dictated by fixation on the past (marauders in particular), and that DD's remark, "It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live," might apply to Snape, except it would be "dwell on the past." Of course, it also speaks volumes to what Harry failed to learn in time for OotP (dreams, Harry! geez?) Oryomai: I think we're all past-oriented. Everyone's decisions are shaped by what has happened in their past. He has a past that's pretty high up there on the terrible list -- he's an ex-Death Eater. He has to spend half his time thinking that someone is out to get him. And with his past, is he tied to all of it, or is it just that we only think about it when the Marauders are involved? Potions seems to be something that he figured out all on his own. His spells are something he did on his own. I don't think Harry gets past his past very well. Every time something happens at Hogwarts, he assumes that Severus is involved. Harry isn't innocent of this. I don't think Severus is either, but I don't think it's as bad as everyone makes it out to be. Celia: 11. My bulleted list of other SS/PS topics that I believe will play in the end: *Grindelwald? *Centaurs? *"Snape was trying to *save* me?" (Harry, pg.289) *"?your mother needn't have died?" (Quirrell, pg. 294) *"Always use the proper names for things." (DD, pg. 298) (I don't know, every witch and wizard says "Voldemort" at the same instant, and PooF! Yay! (Uh oh, better wrap up, I'm getting tired.)) Oryomai: *Well, I really liked the TBAY post the other day about LV being DD. So, going along with that, maybe LV!DD went to the past and redeemed himself by killing Grindelwald. Just a thought... *I think we saw all we're going to from the centaurs as a whole. Firenze, on the other hand, might actually have something to teach us. *Life Debt? Maybe Harry will figure out Wormtail has one to him someday.... *Well, we are going to find out more about the night the lights went out in Godric's Hollow... And I don't touch the missing 24 hours! I get too confused! Fabulous post! Oryomai, who thinks maybe one of the Potters' MIA friends was there that night and that's why they haven't contacted Harry.... ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Feb 6 08:35:07 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 08:35:07 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164672 "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > JKR went on record as saying that there > are two character deaths in Book 7 No that's not what she said. She was talking about changes in the original Harry Potter blueprint that she made many years ago, long before book 1 was even published. In addition to all the original carnage she had in mind two characters that she had originally let live she decided to kill and one character she had originally killed she decided to let live. The net result is we have one more dead body. I don't really expect it, but for all we know from what she has told us every character except one dies. Perhaps Harry is the only survivor, but I wouldn't really count that as a happy ending. Eggplant From caspenzoe at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 10:49:51 2007 From: caspenzoe at yahoo.com (caspenzoe) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 10:49:51 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164673 > Alla wrote: > > > > Why do we need the strong female character just for the sake of > > having one? What if JKR felt that good story could be written > > **only** with the male characters in it? Does she **owe** us the > > presence of female characters in the story? I would say not at all. > > Just as if she wished to write a story about women only, as long as > > it is good story, IMO it is all that counts. > > Julie: > I never said nor think that JKR "owes" us well-developed female > characters, I just pointed out that the male characters are for > the most part more well-developed and multi-layered than the > female characters (especially the adult ones). Caspen: I'm just curious whether it bothers Alla at all that, although JKR doesn't "owe" us "a strong female [adult] character," she has in fact, claimed to have provided one, and gone on to promise to develop Lilly and Petunia further on several occasions, and even, implicitly, Minerva, and yet, she has not done so. Nor, given the amount of territory she seems to have left to cover, does it seem at all likely that she ever will, if as she also says, her HP books will be limited to seven. In short, she seems to have lied, something she claims she doesn't do. While I don't think a strong adult female character is neccessarily owed, I do think it would improve her work immensely. If you follow any literary analysis, such as that of John Granger, for instance, you know that JKR is arguably working within a very long literary tradition, to which the addition of any, if not a powerful, true female perspective, would, IMO be really innovative and contribute a real greatness to the work. As it stands, she seems to have missed that boat. I expect, after the last book is published, and the suspense has subsided, she'll have consigned herself to notability, when she was capable of more. Oh well. What do you think Julie? Caspen From muellem at bc.edu Tue Feb 6 12:36:11 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 12:36:11 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164675 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > > JKR went on record as saying that there > > are two character deaths in Book 7 > > Eggplant wrote: > No that's not what she said. She was talking about changes in the > original Harry Potter blueprint that she made many years ago, long > before book 1 was even published. In addition to all the original > carnage she had in mind two characters that she had originally let > live she decided to kill and one character she had originally killed > she decided to let live. The net result is we have one more dead body. > I don't really expect it, but for all we know from what she has told > us every character except one dies. Perhaps Harry is the only > survivor, but I wouldn't really count that as a happy ending. > I don't know about that. I went to the leaky site & this is what they had to say: from : http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/#book:7 "During a Dec. 2006 update to her site, she said she is writing "scenes that have been planned, in some cases, for a dozen years or even more. I don't think anyone who has not been in a similar situation can possibly know how this feels: I am alternately elated and overwrought. I both want, and don't want, to finish this book (don't worry, I will.)" Some have interpreted that to mean that she is writing scenes which are big and important, meaning that she is close to finishing. J.K. Rowling has also said that at least two people will die, and that one person that she didn't expect to live has been granted a reprieve." so, I don't know if book 7 will have "carnage" in it. I expect some people to die, but mainly the DE's. I don't expect any major characters (good ones) to die. I think Wormtail will die(life debt to Harry and all) and I believe Snape is the one that got the reprieve. I would love the link to the interview where she stated that 2 characters that she wasn't going to kill are now going to die. I've searched for it and cannot find it and the leaky site is pretty good about quoting and stuff. Is this just another snopes moment? Either that, or my googling attempts are pretty lame. After all, OotP had a big battle and what happened to the DE's? They went to prison - they could have easily been killed off by JKR and no one would have cared one wit, nor would have it been considered carnage. The person to die in that battle was Sirius, which I guess needed to be done, although I didn't like it, nor do I agree with why it had to be done. colebiancardi(not expecting a bloody 7th book, but a haunted one) From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue Feb 6 13:40:36 2007 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 05:40:36 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164676 > Alla wrote: > > > > Why do we need the strong female character just for the sake of > > having one? What if JKR felt that good story could be written > > **only** with the male characters in it? Does she **owe** us the > > presence of female characters in the story? I would say not at all. > > Just as if she wished to write a story about women only, as long as > > it is good story, IMO it is all that counts. > > Julie: > I never said nor think that JKR "owes" us well-developed female > characters, I just pointed out that the male characters are for the > most part more well-developed and multi-layered than the female > characters (especially the adult ones). Sherry: This is actually something that's always bothered me about the criticism around no strong female characters. I can imagine that if the story had been Hermione Granger and the ... we might have seen more interesting women in the books. But Harry's POV seems that we naturally see more of the male characters. I am not a psychologist and I don't have children, but I've lived with friends who have three boys, at times when the boys were young and when they were pre teens or teenagers. They were closer to their mom, more in tune with females in their lives when they were younger, and they seemed to need to spend more time with their dad and other guys in their teens. I think it's a sort of natural part of Harry's age that as we are seeing things through his view, we are seeing more male characters developed. however, having said that, I've never thought Minerva was a flat character. She could be stereotypic in some ways, but as JKR herself has said in other subjects, she is following a particular genre to some extent, it doesn't matter to me that some of the characters are types and not fleshed out too much. I'm not interested in Minerva's, Molly's nor any other woman's back story in the series. I mostly care about Harry's journey. I'd have liked more back story on the marauders, but the story is about Harry's generation, which is also part of why we may not have extremely developed characters in the adult generation. It isn't about them. Unlike a number of people, I'm not interested in Snape's or Dumbledore's back story either, except in whatever ways it might relate to Harry's journey. The only female I want to learn anything about is lily, and that's mostly because I am hoping she will be revealed to have some flaw or other. That's what I can't find realistic: we've had James knocked off his pedestal, but we still have the "Sainted lily", as I call her. if James wasn't perfect, especially as a teenage boy, then I sure hope to see lily with a few faults for a change too. I mean, even her sacrifice in dying for Harry is considered more important, or braver than that of James who died defending his family. So, yeah, let's see a little imperfection in perfect Lily. Otherwise, the rest of the female characters don't matter much to me in the overall story. Sherry From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 13:43:33 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 13:43:33 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164677 > Caspen: > > I'm just curious whether it bothers Alla at all that, although JKR > doesn't "owe" us "a strong female [adult] character," she has in fact, > claimed to have provided one, and gone on to promise to develop Lilly > and Petunia further on several occasions, and even, implicitly, > Minerva, and yet, she has not done so. Nor, given the amount of > territory she seems to have left to cover, does it seem at all likely > that she ever will, if as she also says, her HP books will be limited > to seven. In short, she seems to have lied, something she claims she > doesn't do. Alla: That depends on what exactly you are asking bothers me. If you mean that she did not provide strong female character, then no it does not bother me, because I believe that Hermione counts as one and Ginny has a potential to be. But as I said, if I would have enjoyed the story, I would not necessarily bothered if no strong female characters were were at all, it is just I disagree with basic premises, I think we have at least one. If you mean that whether the absense of well developed female characters from adults generation bothers me, well again, no it does not. One because I think Molly is complex enough and second because I do not see that the story is suffering from it. Does it bother me that Petunia and Lily and Minerva are not well developed despite her promise? Well, there is one more book left, so I will wait, but even if they would not be and I can still enjoy the story, it would not bother me. BUT does it bother me that she felt a need to say that? Yes, **that** absolutely does bother me, IF she did not intend to do that in book 7. I believe that for example her adding up the portraits of Headmistresses to be in the same area as DD speech in OOP. I believe that she wanted to defend herself, etc. I wish she would not. I do not see WW as modern society at all. I think that if she wanted to write about patriarchal society, because it suits her story better, she should have been strong enough to stick to it. And it would have been credible to me that some changes will be starting at the end with Hermione doing it ( improving women's situation, etc) But again, that is all assuming that no developments for adults female characters will follow in book 7. Maybe it will be. > Caspen: > >> While I don't think a strong adult female character is neccessarily > owed, I do think it would improve her work immensely. If you follow any > literary analysis, such as that of John Granger, for instance, you know > that JKR is arguably working within a very long literary tradition, to > which the addition of any, if not a powerful, true female perspective, > would, IMO be really innovative and contribute a real greatness to the > work. As it stands, she seems to have missed that boat. I expect, after > the last book is published, and the suspense has subsided, she'll have > consigned herself to notability, when she was capable of more. Alla: And unless she punishes Snape, she is a child abuse supporter and a very bad writer On the other hand, if she makes Snape evil, that would be a real cliche and bad lesson for the kids. Oh, and she is way too closely follows the Hero journey formula. Because she killed off Sirius and Dumbledore she is a terrible writer as well . And if she kills of Harry, she is a bad writer, but if she lets him live, she would be even worse one, because that would mean that the ending would be boring and we will forget one the very next day. She is a bad writer for abandoning more interesting SHIP Harry/Hermione, but she wrote Harry/Ginny even more horribly. I am sure other readers can add a plenty wishes for JKR, which unless she fulfilles they would consider her to be a bad writer, LOL. I am just thinking that her work would have to include too many things, had she followed all of our wishes, if it was not necessary for the story. So, I think you may still get your wish for well developed adult female in book 7 or not. Personally I would not mind to see Lily better developed at all, but my wish for that is primarily because I am incredibly annoyed with her implying that James sacrifice was somehow less significant. JMO, Alla From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Feb 6 14:06:05 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 14:06:05 -0000 Subject: And in the end...SS/PS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164678 Celia: > 1 "Sent owls off ter all yer parents' old school friends," > (pg. 304) says Hagrid, as he gives Harry the photo album at the end > of the book. This seems to be a reference to a number of old > friends that Hagrid has easy access to. Do we know any of these old > friends (aside from Lupin, the only one we know for sure)? Is this > the Order, or are there further relationships between characters > we know and the Potters that will be revealed in DH? (assuming JKR > is truthful that no new major characters are to come.) Will Harry's > ability to pull people together also include his parents' friends? Jen: I'm thinking they were people who didn't keep up with the Potters after Hogwarts or the wedding, people with regular lives and not living the dangerous life of an Order member. I expect Harry will meet at least one of Lily's friends: Hestia Jones of the Advance Guard. Lupin said all volunteered with the implication being all had an interest in seeing Harry. Hestia's description made her sound young enough that she and Lily could have been at Hogwarts together and in the Order. Celia: > 2. Hagrid is the Keeper of the Keys (pg. 48). Although this has > been discussed ad nauseum in the past, I still believe that in this > title lies the fact that Hagrid is a "key" to the ending of the > books and the defeat of Voldemort. How, you ask? Hmm a piece of > information he has, something he witnessed, something from Tom's > Hogwart's years that he knows, something about Snape? What do you > think? Jen: Now I've never thought about it that way, the key to the ending. I get the sense JKR is building for two of her most humble characters, Hagrid and Dobby, to play a huge role in helping Harry during his final quest since both are undyingly loyal to him. I like the idea proposed by Oryomai that Hagrid has information about a Horcrux without knowing it, maybe something he stumbled across on the grounds and didn't realize? I could see the possibilty of Voldemort hiding a Horcrux at Hogwarts (Forbidden Forest maybe?), given how significant the place is to him. Or Hagrid's been drinking ale out of a shiny gold cup all these years and never knew it was a Hufflepuff relic. :) Celia: > 3."Dunno if he had enough human left in him to die." (Hagrid, > pg. 57) Hmm, awfully close to horcruxes during the very first > discussion of Voldy! This statement is so close to what we finally > learn to be true 6 books later, I wonder is this just the writing > of a woman who was unsure any more books in the series would be > published? Or does Hagrid know more than he lets on? Or is it > common knowledge that VM is less than human or changed? Seems like > a very accurate statement from Hagrid at this point. I'm keeping my > eye on Hagrid. Jen: I wonder if Hagrid has connected that Riddle is Voldemort? I'm keeping my eye on him definitely, because he's the only one left on the good side who knew Riddle (except perhaps McGonagall, but if she knew him it's never been explicitly stated). Harry should pick his brain at some point. > 4."There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who > wasn't in Slytherin." (pg. 80) The alienation of the Slytherin > crowd is a huge theme, started here in SS/PS, which I believe will > hold a key to the resolution of the series as well. How do > all of our "good" characters get to justify this bias? How does > JKR? How does this bias self-perpetuate, as in Draco's desire to be > in Slytherin? What will break this down (as I believe it must be > broken in the end)? Jen: There is a bias, and there's also the fact that Riddle tainted Slytherin house for generations to come. Recruiting his first followers from his own house caused the generational linkage of DE's to develop, like a poison seeping down through the years. The end of Voldemort will help break this cycle, but the other necessary piece is for the current generation to start the peace accords for the future (Harry and Draco specifically). I don't know if something drastic will happen, such as McGonagall dissolving the house structure, but I could see there being a slow movement toward Slytherin house becoming what it once was meant to represent (I believe): the importance of family heritage and how cunning and ambition have a place in the world--just ask Harry how he got that memory from Slughorn . The traits favored by all the houses have shadow sides, dark undebellies. Celia: > 5. Ollivander's eyes, his creepy glassy eyes really stuck out > to me as I was reading today. "Wide, pale eyes, shining like moons > Harry wished he would blink. Those silvery eyes were a bit creepy > Harry could see himself reflected in those misty eyes." (pgs. 82- > 83) I am of the belief that Ollivander is not dead, but captive or > fled to Voldemort, and will be important in DH. This description of > him is far more sinister than I remember, and reads to me as > someone hiding things- similar to Snape's glittering eyes. Will > Ollivander be able to alter VM's wand to operate successfully > against Harry? What else might a sinister Ollivander do to alter > the possible final outcome of the books? Where is he? Jen: Oh no! I hope he's not on LV's side. I liked KJ's idea that Dumbledore hid him so Voldemort couldn't force him to make a new wand. And Luna has silvery eyes, so if the two are not related, I very much hope there's something about their unusual eyecolor that indicates an intuition necessary for good wandmaking . I want to hear in the epilogue about Luna finding all sorts of unusual creatures to use in the making of her highly stylistic and unusally powerful wands. > 8. Norbert must come back, right? I mean really, he's a > Chekhov's gun, isn't he? Have to bring him back to resolve the act > one introduction. Just a thought. Jen: Norbert! Yes, he's going to help Harry at a pivotal moment and Hagrid will be so happy he came back to visit his mummy. And there's still the infamous 12 uses for dragons' blood! Celia: > 9."Your father left this in my possession before he died." > (pg. 202) So, I guess we should all still be thinking about why > James left the Invisibility Cloak with DD, since JKR says we > should. Also, the fact that this is supposedly important > does give me hope that JKR is planning to tell us quite a bit about > the events leading up to the Potters' deaths- if we will know why > James left the cloak, then hopefully we will know even more about > what he was up to back then. Jen: I'm with you, Celia--more, more, more! Tell us every tiny detail about what happened between the time of the eavesdropper and the moment Harry landed on the Dursleys' doorstep. Slightly off the subject, I still wonder why Dumbledore made the choice for Harry's future. It may be a moot point, he simply did because he knew more than anyone about the prophecy/Voldemort and no one challenged him after the fact. But it's crossed my mind that the Potters (Lily actually) considered what to do if Sirius died as well, and talked to Dumbledore about the concern if not outright asking him to be back-up guardian. > 11. My bulleted list of other SS/PS topics that I believe will > play in the end: > *Grindelwald? Jen: Had a Horcrux. Dumbledore made some critical error that cost him people he loved before finally defeating GW (explaining his outpourings in the cave). > *" your mother needn't have died " (Quirrell, pg. 294) Jen: Important, not just Voldemort focusing on his goal of Harry. Considered needing her for something? Knew something about her that gave him pause? Don't know. > 12. Finally, The Biggie (and go over it again or don't, we just > can't ignore it in this type of list, if you ask me): The missing > 24 hours. Jen: Ack, makes my head hurt to put all the details together. This would fall under my more, more more! category. My only hope is it's *not* JKR's maths or a geography issue--big letdown. Thank you Celia, now I'm motivated to plough through PS and get to the rest of the series before the big day. Jen R. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Feb 6 14:20:22 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 14:20:22 -0000 Subject: "Flying" Hagrid and "Home Stretch" reread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164679 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "serenadust" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dave Hardenbrook > wrote: > > > > > Today is Day 5 in my reread, and in PS/SS Ch. 5, "Diagon Alley", I > > found something odd -- As they leave for London, Hagrid explains > > to Harry that he "flew" to the Rock. But how?? There's no sign of > > Buckbeak, and I'm sure somewhere Hagrid says he's too big to mount a > > broom. So what does he mean?? Is it possible that there's a > > Thestral there that Harry of course doesn't see? Or did Hagrid > > simply apparate to the Rock (since he seems to disapparate at the end of > the > > chapter)? > > > > Any thoughts? > Jo S: > Hi David; you've driven me out of lurkdom to post one of my personal > favorite (pointless) theories. > > I've always liked to think that when Hagrid replied to Harry's asking > how he got to the Rock, Harry thinks he says "Flew" but in fact he > said, "Floo". > > Of course this requires that there be another fireplace on the tiny > island, but canon doesn't entirely rule this out, does it? Geoff: On the other hand, canon rather chucks cold water on the idea..... "Found the perfect place!"' he said. "Come on! Everyone out!" It was very cold outside the car. Uncle Vernon was pointing at what looked like a large rock way out to sea. Perched on top of the rock was the most miserable little shack you could imagine. One thing was certain, there was no television in there.' (Philosopher's Stone, "The :Letters from No One", p.37 UK edition) The suggestion seems to be that there isn't room for another building, hence no fireplace. From fairwynn at hotmail.com Tue Feb 6 14:35:12 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 14:35:12 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164680 > > > > "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > > > > JKR went on record as saying that there > > > are two character deaths in Book 7 > > > > Eggplant wrote: > > No that's not what she said. She was talking about changes in the > > original Harry Potter blueprint that she made many years ago, long > > before book 1 was even published. In addition to all the original > > carnage she had in mind two characters that she had originally let > > live she decided to kill and one character she had originally killed > > she decided to let live. > > > colebiancardi > I don't know about that. I went to the leaky site & this is what they > had to say: > from : http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/#book:7 > > "During a Dec. 2006 update to her site, she said she is writing > "scenes that have been planned, in some cases, for a dozen years or > even more. I don't think anyone who has not been in a similar > situation can possibly know how this feels: I am alternately elated > and overwrought. I both want, and don't want, to finish this book > (don't worry, I will.)" > > Some have interpreted that to mean that she is writing scenes which > are big and important, meaning that she is close to finishing. > > J.K. Rowling has also said that at least two people will die, and that > one person that she didn't expect to live has been granted a reprieve." wynnleaf Alright, time to quote exactly what JKR said about the 2 character deaths. >From An Evening With Harrie, Carrie, and Garp, at Radio City Music Hall on Aug. 1, 2006: Audience member question (paraphrased): "Have there been any changes to what you initially planned out?" Rowling: "It is different to an extent. The essential plot is what I always planned when working toward the end I've planned toward the beginning. But a couple of characters I expected to survive have died and one character got a reprieve, so there have been some fairly major changes I suppose." wynnleaf I think we can assume that in her original plans, there were already some deaths planned -- obviously, or one character would have no "reprieve." But two characters who she originally expected to survive -- characters who were not among the characters she had originally planned to die -- have now died in DH. That means two *additional* characters from the ones she already planned. The "reprieve" would mean one originally planned for death won't die. Unless she only originally planned only one death, and that character got a reprieve, it sounds to me that most likely more than two characters die in DH. wynnleaf From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue Feb 6 14:40:39 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 14:40:39 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164681 Alla: > > Why do we need the strong female character just for the sake of > > having one? What if JKR felt that good story could be written > > **only** with the male characters in it? Does she **owe** us the > > presence of female characters in the story? I would say not at all. > > Just as if she wished to write a story about women only, as long as > > it is good story, IMO it is all that counts. > Julie: > I never said nor think that JKR "owes" us well-developed female > characters, I just pointed out that the male characters are for the > most part more well-developed and multi-layered than the female > characters (especially the adult ones). Sherry: This is actually something that's always bothered me about the criticism around no strong female characters. I can imagine that if the story had been Hermione Granger and the ... we might have seen more interesting women in the books. But Harry's POV seems that we naturally see more of the male characters. I am not a psychologist and I don't have children, but I've lived with friends who have three boys, at times when the boys were young and when they were pre teens or teenagers. They were closer to their mom, more in tune with females in their lives when they were younger, and they seemed to need to spend more time with their dad and other guys in their teens. I think it's a sort of natural part of Harry's age that as we are seeing things through his view, we are seeing more male characters developed. Ceridwen: I absolutely agree with Sherry. Harry is a young male reaching for adulthood. He will naturally be more drawn to adult males as role models instead of females. It's part of learning. He is more obsessed with learning about James than about Lily, he is drawn to Dumbledore more than to Minerva, and to Remus more than to Tonks. The only flip I see there is that he seems to prefer Molly's company to Arthur's, but that could just be that Arthur is usually at work until late and he sees more of Molly. This could also be the last vestiges of his need for the Nurturing!Female, and for Harry, she is his only good example of a mother figure. We just talked about Jung and archetypes in my Fiction class - talk about coincidences, that was just last night. ;) Jung believed, whether you agree with him or not, that mothers/women are seen in the nurturing role while fathers/men are seen as providers and protectors, and that this is ingrained into the Collective Subconscious. Since Harry is in a position to need protection, then of course the story would revolve around more male characters than female characters. As the Hero (another archetype), Harry is able to see to his own nurturing, from what we see in the books. His Wicked Stepmother and her family (another archetype) has treated him badly and cast him off. The Hero usually does break away from women's apron strings, live in a malecentric world to learn his Hero's craft, then go out and vanquish whatever demons he needs to vanquish to fulfill his role as Hero. Since Harry is a male, he will also be learning his archetypal role as provider and protector. I accept that, since Harry is a male, he will take more notice of males, and he will seek out the company of older males as he matures and learns this role in life. I agree that if the story had been about Hermione Granger and (book title here), she would have sought out more females as companions and as mentors. We would have seen strong women filling the roles of Dumbledore, Sirius, Remus and Snape. She may even have had a bonding with Househusband!Arthur, since Molly would have been working late at the MoM. But, that wasn't the story that JKR's muse presented. Alla: Does it bother me that Petunia and Lily and Minerva are not well developed despite her promise? Well, there is one more book left, so I will wait, but even if they would not be and I can still enjoy the story, it would not bother me. BUT does it bother me that she felt a need to say that? Yes, **that** absolutely does bother me, IF she did not intend to do that in book 7. Ceridwen: It bothers me a lot, as someone who has tried her hand at writing. Sometimes it seems that stories want, in part, to write themselves. When JKR said Harry just appeared to her fully formed and with a story, I believe her. I think that JKR goes to lengths already, within the confines of the Harry Filter, to show strong women in positions of power in the Wizarding World. She does mention Headmistresses, and female Ministers of Magic. Witches have contributed to historic developments in the WW, and witches play equally on the Quidditch teams. Withces are not discouraged from applying for courses of study or for jobs that we have seen. Hermione and Ginny are presented as powerful young witches. McGonagall is shown to be competent in her subject and valued enough to be next in line to the headship of Hogwarts. Books that are merely there to present a political viewpoint are not always well-written, because the author tries to force his or her opinion onto characters and situations which may be rebelling against them (see above about stories wanting to write themselves). The end results are contrived and often stilted. By sticking to her original vision, JKR has written a series of books that has not lost its focus or its interest to fans, the way some other series have done. She has shown us things at the edges of Harry's vision that promise more from the WW than is presented on the page. In my opinion, of course. Alla: And unless she punishes Snape, she is a child abuse supporter and a very bad writer On the other hand, if she makes Snape evil, that would be a real cliche and bad lesson for the kids. *(snip)* Ceridwen: Absolutely! If I had my way, Lupinlore's chipper would be very busy. If Lupinlore had his way, my books would collect dust and I'd throw myself onto the sword of fanfic. We all have our cherished hoped-for outcomes. I doubt if any of us will have all of our hopes answered. But, my most cherished hope will be answered if JKR is able to maintain the same quality of storytelling through to the end, allowing the story to reach its natural conclusion, rather than try to force it into a mold that would make Deathly Hallows the worst, most contrived, book of the series. Ceridwen. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 15:41:13 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:41:13 -0000 Subject: Sexist JKR? Was Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164682 Caspen wrote: > > I'm very glad you're not offended Carol, and that you like disagreement, because I'm afraid I've still plenty. However, before I remove my gloves, I'd like to to congradulate cassyvablatsky, for her excellent list of citations to JKR's interview comments On Minerva. I'm not a regular poster here - mostly just a lurker who happens to be exercised by this particular issue I've read the whole thing published so far several times now, stems, in large part, from a now (still barely) conscious urge to repress a very sick feeling that JKR's treatment of Minerva thus far is simply sexist abuse. Carol responds: Yes, evidently, that's the problem. You're "exercised" by what you consider to be an important issue, athe supposed sexism of the books, and I'm completely indifferent to charges of sexism, ageism, racism (as if Harry and Aunt Petunia were members of different races!), speciesism or any other kind of -ism. Whereas you judge a book by whether it conforms to your sense of how the world ought to be, I judge it on its entertainment value, readability, humor and pathos, on whether it can be reread multiple times with equal enjoyment and be subject to interpretation. Rather than imposing my value system on a book, I like to determine (when I'm considering values at all) what the value system of the author or her created society is and whether it's intenally consistent. I like textual analysis, interpreting the words on the page (irony, subtext, unreliable narrator and all) to figure out the meaning in relation to character, plot, themes and motifs, symbolism, etc. I would even discuss setting and atmosphere in relation to theme if someone posted on that topic. I like to examine narrative technique and etymology in relation to the text. I am not at all interested in the author's politics (I can barely tolerate SPEW), and in her religion only as it affects the theme and characters and probable plot of Book seven. This thread started out as an examination of McGonagall's character traits in relation to Dumbledore's motives in not confiding in her. I provided some ideas on the subject--my view of her character and responsibilities and possible reasons why Dumbledore might have (apparently) excluded her from membership in the first Order and (definitely) refrained from telling her about the Prophecy and the blood protection. If you don't like my proposed reasons (her underlying emotionalism or sentimentality, her already heavy workload and his desire to have her focus her efforts on Hogwarts, and, especially, his need-to-know policy), please present your own, preferably supported by canon. I withdraw the remark about her age, which would not be a reason for not confiding in her. My point in presenting my reasons was that I don't think she's evil or enchanted, and I do think that DD must have some valid reason (other than being so brilliant that he has no equal or confidante) for not confiding in her. He doesn't confide in Sprout or Flitwick, either, and in Snape only because Snape is in a position to know more than anyone else on the staff about the Prophecy and Voldemort. (Even he doesn't know the entire Prophecy unless he's placed his own memory in a Pensieve to hear it.) As for McG's workload, it's really difficult to compare her workload to Dumbledore's since we so seldom see either of them except in relation to Harry, nor do I think comparing and contrasting them is particularly relevant. But I will say (and please don't get upset or offended if you disagree with me) that Dumbledore's duties as Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot and so forth don't seem to impose a particularly heavy burden on him as he's usually at Hogwarts (HBP excepted) and his duties at Hogwarts are largely ceremonial and administrative. He presides at feasts and other special occasions, makes announcements, hires staff members and consults with them and whatever else administrators do, but McGonagall also has administrative duties as deputy headmistress (such as overseeing the commentary at Quidditch games, attending meetings, and taking on Dumbledore's duties when he's absent in books other than OoP) and whatever is involved in being Head of Gryffindor House--all of that in addition to teaching (classroom duties, class preparation, creating tests, marking homework) and occasionally presiding over detentions. Whether she's seventy or thirty-five, that's a lot of work for anybody. Caspen: And how, exactly, is Minerva's workload so much heavier than Dumbledore's? It's not, what with his extra-curricular Wizengamut activities, Voldemort history compilation activities, etc. Finally, why is Minerva's age such an issue for you, while Dumbledore's (who's far older, no? Carol: As I said, I'm not going to argue about whether I think her workload is heavier than DD's, especially since we know so little about what DD actually does when he isn't with Harry, but hers is a heavy workload, witch or no witch, and I'm glad I'm not in her shoes. It has nothing to do with sexism or ageism; if she were a youngish man of about thirty-five, I'd feel the same way, having been a teacher myself for eighteen years. I wouldn't want Snape's workload, either. And he, too, is under Dumbledore's protection except when he goes out "at great personal risk" to speak with DEs and Voldemort. There is no reason whatever why McGonagall or any other member of DD's staff should be exposed to that particular risk, any more than they should consort with werewolves as Lupin, his former DADA teacher, is expected to do. To each his or her own. The one time we see McGonagall at 12 GP, she's dressed as a Muggle, so we can attempt to deduce her Order duties from that. Her ability to disguise herself as a cat could prove important, too. (I can just see her enlisting Crookshanks to chase after Rat!Wormtail.) Anyway, please, let's keep our gloves on and maintain a civil and impersonal tone, not to mention keeping our emotions out of the discussion as far as possible. I'm not going to respond to combativeness (this list isn't a boxing ring), and I have no intention of arguing about whether the depiction of McGonagall is sexist. Frankly, I don't care whether it is or not. I'm only interested in what makes her tick and why Dumbledore doesn't treat her as his equal despite a high degree of competence as teacher, administrator, and disciplinarian. (She's a little too ready to close down the school when times get hard, but that's her concern for the students. Emotionalism again?) Caspen: > I'm a little disappointed Carol that you haven't really addressed any of my points in your response above: namely, how is Minerva any "softer" on Harry than Dumbledore? I don't believe she is. Carol: Forgive me for overlooking this point. I was distracted by the emotionalism and personal nature of the response. I do think she's "softer" than Dumbledore, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. So is Hagrid. So are a lot of other characters. Dumbledore left Harry at the Dursleys' despite McGonagall's objections (giving her only a partial reason for not doing so and concealing the all-important blood protection). McGonagall buys Harry a broom and allows him on the Quidditch team as a first-year (perhaps not "softness" but certainly giving him special privileges for the sake of her Quidditch team.) We several times see her with a tear in her eye, revealing what I see as maternal concern for him, matched, perhaps, by the overly sentimental tear in DD's eye over, of all things, giving the Prefectship to Ron rather than Harry (not one of my favorite DD moments). But Dumbledore gives Harry his father's Invisibility Cloak, not out of softness but (IMO) to see how he'll use it. He encourages Harry and Hermione to use the Time Turner to rescue Buckbeak and Sirius Black, a difficult and dangerous challenge for a thirteen- and fourteen-year-old. He allows Harry to participate in the TWT (probably he has no choice) without training him himself. He assigns Snape, a strict teacher with no love lost for Harry, to teach him Occlumency without explaining why he isn't doing it himself. He takes Harry with him to a cave which he knows will be filled with deadly dangers to find a Horcrux, in itself a dangerous object (or it would be if it weren't a fake). Dumbledore alone (except for Harry) knows the full Prophecy. Dumbledore alone knows what Harry will face and exactly what he has already faced. (I'm not sure exactly how much either McGonagall or Snape knows of Harry's various encounters with Voldemort, but neither is present for all of his discussions with Dumbledore.) Dumbledore, with Snape's help, is trying to prepare Harry for what he must face. Except for teaching him Transfiguration, along with all the other students, and her vow to make sure he takes the classes he needs to become an Auror, McGonagall has no role in that preparation. To return to McGonagall, the occasional softness humanizes her character. We know that she genuinely cares about Harry. The stern, no-nonsense exterior masks a caring heart. What on earth is wrong with that? Softness is not cowardice or weakness. She stands up to Umbridge and takes four Stunners to the chest as a consequence. The cowards in the books are male--Karkaroff and Wormtail. Caspen: Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here) and Hagrid's (who's the same age, but spends the summer lately in "diplomatic" missions with giants, and spent a recent school year sparring with Grawp) are not? I'm sorry, but I can't see it as anything other than sexist malarky. Carol: Why doesn't Dumbledore appoint her as ambassador to the giants? Because she'd probably be killed, just as Snape or Bill Weasley would be. It makes sense to send Hagird and Madame Maxime, two half-giants, just as it makes sense to send Lupin to the werewolves and Snape to the DEs. DD isn't questioning her courage or her competence. He just has two people who are tailor-made for the job. "Sexist malarky?" Madame Maxime is female, or was last time I checked the text. (As for age, it's true that Hagrid is only about five years younger than McG, but maybe age shows up differently in half-giants? Actually, I think it's an oversight on JKR's part. She doesn't seem to think of Hagrid as being in his sixties. But I'm not going to lose any sleep over it, regardless.) Caspen: Care to place a wager on not just whether, but how many male charachters' tears exceed those of Minerva? Carol: Considering that Hagrid cries buckets in every book, I think he's the clear winner. Exactly how that qualifies as sexist, I neither know nor care. > > So, don't expect me to sit here in my not so young state and respond > with "oh, of course,...obviously..." when you excuse JKR'S sexism > toward Minerva, based upon Minerva's age and supposed excessive > emotionality. Carol: Let's skip the personal attacks, shall we? I'm not excusing what you perceive as sexism. I just don't read the books in that way. I analyze motives and character traits. I interpret the text in hopes of understanding the books more fully. My own politics, philosophy, religion, and moral philosophy are my own business and have nothing to do with the interpretation of JKR's works. Carol, who has nothing more to say on this topic but will (silently) accept your apologies if they're offered From jmmears at comcast.net Tue Feb 6 15:48:04 2007 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:48:04 -0000 Subject: "Flying" Hagrid and "Home Stretch" reread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164683 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > I've always liked to think that when Hagrid replied to Harry's asking > > how he got to the Rock, Harry thinks he says "Flew" but in fact he > > said, "Floo". > > > > Of course this requires that there be another fireplace on the tiny > > island, but canon doesn't entirely rule this out, does it? > Geoff: > On the other hand, canon rather chucks cold water on the idea..... > > "Found the perfect place!"' he said. "Come on! Everyone out!" > It was very cold outside the car. Uncle Vernon was pointing at > what looked like a large rock way out to sea. Perched on top of > the rock was the most miserable little shack you could imagine. > One thing was certain, there was no television in there.' > (Philosopher's Stone, "The :Letters from No One", p.37 UK edition) > > The suggestion seems to be that there isn't room for another > building, hence no fireplace. Ah, yes the suggestion does *seem* to be that there isn't another building, but doesn't completely rule out the possibility of floo powder. Perhaps there's the ruin of an earlier hut on the far side of the rock with the remains of a fireplace (c'mon, work with me here, Geoff ;D). How about one of those outdoor brick barbeque grills with a chimney? Anyway, I'm not really trying to convince anyone of this. I just find the broom and flying motorcycle ideas rather dull, and I had the impression from somewhere that it wasn't possible to apparate over water (and that isn't the same as "flew" anyway). I like my "floo" theory (can you tell?) and I'm sticking with it :-P. Jo S., possibly in error, but never in doubt From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 15:58:52 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:58:52 -0000 Subject: Dark Mirror, Part 1: Hairy as Lupin... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164684 Talisman said: > So then: 1, 2...3... Poof! Watch as Book 7 Harry transforms into > Lupin, before your very eyes. > > I absolutely guarantee that Harry will manifest Lupin's darkest > secret, throughout the bulk of Deathly Hallows. > > You can take that much to the bank, and tell them Talisman sent you. > > The devil, naturally, is in the details. > > I don't expect Harry to actually become a werewolf. I could be wrong > about this, Hedwig knows; Greyback might be skulking in the > shrubbery at Privet Drive as we speak. But, heretofore unused > aconite lessons and wombatish whisperings of bite epidemics > notwithstanding, I would find it incongruent to have Harry literally > pop a snout in the final stretch. Annemehr: I agree -- no hairy Harry. But, speaking of Greyback (whose name, I am pleased to note, is spelled with an E), we look forward to seeing Bill's wedding in the earliest chapters. I wonder if it's scheduled around the time of the full moon? I wonder if it will help set the tone for this new instalment? But, on to the heart of the matter: Talisman: > Instead, my expectation is that Harry will undergo a Dark > Transformation. > > The prospects are delightful, and let`s face it the gathering storm > is already in evidence. > Like Lupin, Harry was "infected" in early childhood. Of course, > instead of werewolf drool, Harry got that big squirt of evil wizard > juice. > > It's still in there you know, and I'll bet it can activate. > > Moreover, it's clear that DD wants Harry to go postal in the final > run. Annemehr: Whaaaat??? Dumbledore's man through and through, go dark? Is that any way for him to honor his mentor's memory and sacrifice? I mean, in HBP, Harry's whole heart is thrown into the role of being Dumbledore's man. Just look at how emphatically he asserts it, to Scrimgeour and to DD himself! Better yet, look at Harry's actions. We see early on that, despite what his expectations may have been, Harry takes his cue from DD as to what his preparation for facing LV should entail. When Harry first told Ron and Hermione he'd be having "private lessons" from DD, she immediately surmised he'd be learning "really advanced defensive magic, probably" [HBP, p. 99 US]. But if DD saw fit to focus instead on LV's history, who is Harry to argue? He's just following DD's lead, right? And he did -- he paid attention to the lessons, and asked questions and everything. Then, in the cave, he followed DD's wishes so far as to feed him every drop of that horrible potion. But on the other hand, *did* Harry really follow DD's lead? And, in what ways? Maybe...can we already see some cracks in DDM!Harry? People have already discussed in this group Harry's half-hearted efforts to get Slughorn's true memory until DD got really stern with him. We see that, just as DD had to *insist* that Harry promise to follow orders in the cave, he had to *insist* that Harry quit playing around and get that memory. That's one issue. There is also the matter of DADA lessons with Snape, where I think Harry's behavior is telling. After all, *Dumbledore* put Snape into that all-important position, and *Dumbledore* continues to tell Harry he trusts Snape, and that there is a reason, but "DDM!Harry" never seems to take any of this to heart. It is true that Harry wonders what this reason could be, but it seems to me it is only in order that he can judge this reason for himself. Meanwhile, Harry never *acts* as though he ever considers that DD could be right about Snape. Contrast this with Harry's response to DD's words regarding LV: Talisman pointed out: > As usual none of DD's rationale hangs together. But when has that > bothered Harry? > > DD insists that Harry *must* try to kill Voldemort, in retribution > for James and Lily. > > Of course, Harry is hardly unique in having lost loved ones to > Voldemort. If vigilante justice is to hold the day, or if vengeance > is a compelling substitute for a "real" prophecy, Harry should have > to queue up behind a long line of bereaved friends and family, > starting with Myrtle's kin. > > There is also the argument of Harry's special power. Leaving aside > the irony of love and purity as secret murder weapons, we know that > lots of folks are capable of love. Annemehr: You are right. This doesn't make sense. Yet, though Harry won't spare a single thought that DD might be right about Snape, he swallows this stuff about killing LV, whole. And smacks his lips afterward. But I notice a common theme in Harry's responses: hatred. He lets DD's words regarding LV inflame him because he already hates LV, but he *disregards* DD's words of trust in Snape in order to keep on hating Snape. I certainly note and agree with your point (snipped) that both DD and Snape have been cultivating Harry's hatred of Snape since the first book. Still, I say a *real* DDM would take repeated assertions of trust in Snape to heart, and at least begin to *wonder.* Indeed, Talisman, your theory promises to resolve (and how!) something that has been bothering me. What I have been thinking for quite some time (and even posted about recently), is that Harry's psyche seems to be "stuck." He is also changed somehow since the old days, and I am not sure where to pin the change. Harry was recognisably himself, to me, throughout the first four books. I accepted that he was himself -- albeit a version of himself under extreme stress -- in OoP. But... In PS/SS, Harry said: "He's a funny man, Dumbledore. I think he sort of wanted to give me a chance. I think he knows more or less everything that goes on here, you know. I reckon he had a pretty good idea we were going to try, and instead of stopping us, he just taught us enough to help. I don't think it was an accident he let me find out how the Mirror worked. It's almost like he though I had the right to face Voldemort if I could..." [PS/SS ch. 17] It just doesn't seem like Harry has built on that. It actually seems like he has lost some of it. And, I'm not looking for blind, unquestioning acceptance of everything DD says, but Harry would get farther if he at least realised that everything DD says is worth *considering.* Why doesn't he? Is it because, despite that the mind-conduit aspect of Harry's infection by LV has been blocked by Occlumency, the other effects of it upon Harry continue to strengthen? If you are right, then, yes, very much so. Talisman: > I recall annemehr asking me, long years ago--in response to my > position regarding DD's orchestration of events--what it would do to > Harry, to discover that DD had purposed it all. Maybe we'll get the > chance to find out.... ; ) Annemehr: Lots of fun! Harry will be reeling. The bottom will drop out -- over and over -- when he finds out: Exactly what Dumbledore's Plan is; The truth about Severus Snape; I really hope, a little more truth about LV ("Dumbledore raised his eyebrows. 'Could you possibly be feeling sorry for Lord Voldemort?'" HBP ch. 13). And the hardest part -- just a little bit more about himself. Annemehr who was afraid of mirrors in dark rooms for longer than she cares to admit... From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Feb 6 16:09:59 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:09:59 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164685 "colebiancardi" wrote: > would love the link to the interview > where she stated that 2 characters > that she wasn't going to kill are > now going to die. See the article by NICOLE LAMPERT in the June 26 2006 Daily Mail under the headline: "Rowling: 'I may kill off Harry Potter'" According to the article JRR said the following in a rare interview with Richard and Judy on Channel 4: "While one character will now get a reprieve, "two die that I didn't intend to die". Asked by Judy if it will be any of the much loved characters, she said: "A price has to be paid, we are dealing with pure evil here. They don't target extras do they? They go for the main characters...well I do. This is a world where some pretty nasty things can happen."" Eggplant From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Feb 6 16:14:56 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:14:56 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164686 > Caspen: > I'm just curious whether it bothers Alla at all that, although JKR > doesn't "owe" us "a strong female [adult] character," she has in > fact, claimed to have provided one, and gone on to promise to develop > Lilly and Petunia further on several occasions, and even, implicitly, > Minerva, and yet, she has not done so. Nor, given the amount of > territory she seems to have left to cover, does it seem at all likely > that she ever will, if as she also says, her HP books will be limited > to seven. In short, she seems to have lied, something she claims she > doesn't do. Jen: I honestly think JKR is doing something a little deeper with her characters than going for a male/female thing. For instance, take Lily. The sacrificial mother, right? Stereotype. But consider what actually happened there: James 'played the hero' and attempted to defend against Voldemort by fighting him outright, hopelessly outmatched and leading to his death, leaving his wife and child behind to fight Voldemort alone. Lily does what people might consider the sterotypical woman thing, begging, pleading, appealing to Voldemort's humanity and she dies as well for her trouble. But what she did in dying was acutally *protect* Harry in a way that the male valiant hero could never have hoped to do and her act was the catalyst for the entire story. I think it genuinely perplexes JKR to be accused of not having strong female characters when I really believe she's saying that women's strengths, long denigrated by society, are actually THE most important part of the story: 'What do they mean? Lily? Luna? Molly? Hermione? Trelawney? All have contributed to the cause by using skills society has traditionally deemed inferior simply because they are traditonally tied to women's roles, and I'm saying in some cases their strengths have actually done *more* than what the males at the MOM or guys like Harry, Sirius, James or even Dumbledore have been able to accomplish at certain critical junctures. I'm leaving McGongall out of this because she's the *most* stereotypical strong woman in my view--more like a man in other words!! And I won't even go into Hagrid, or Lupin and Slughorn for that matter, men with very well-developed traditionally female charactersitics as their strengths that have kept them alive and making important contributions long after some of the men's men in the story are dead and gone. I think 'strong women' today doesn't mean what it used to, i.e., being more male-like, but realizing how important female characteristics can be to changing societies which have operated as patriarchies for far too long. Jen R. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 15:36:46 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:36:46 -0000 Subject: Lupin and the Reprieve (was Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus ...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164687 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Now before book 6 I thought Lupin is a goner, since all his friends > are gone, nothing to look forward, etc ( of course it is simplistic > for RL - person can still find something to look forward to, but for > book purposes it does symbolise to me the character is past > oriented). > > When JKR gave him a girlfriend, that to me is one of the strongest > signs that Lupin may survive, because he has something oriented to > the future, if that makes sense, something he has to look forward to > after war is done. > Yes, very good point. I also wondered if Lupin was a goner, and like you I think the sudden appearance of Lupin/Tonks is a strong signal that he probably isn't. But the appearance of Lupin/Tonks WAS quite sudden, and in many ways seemed an afterthought. It was as if JKR said "What the hey, I'll give them something they'll like. I know, let's do Lupin/Tonks!" Which in its turn leads me to wonder if Lupin is not, in fact, the person who got the reprieve. (And let us remember that she may not have been talking about one of the main characters at all, it could just as easily be someone like Seamus or Charlie Weasley). The sudden and rather clunky appearance of a ship for him seems ... suspicious. It would make perfect sense if she had planned to kill off Lupin. After all, it would make pretty much a clean sweep of the Marauders, emphasizing the end of a past era, etc. And the fact that he was such an unattached character made him, like Snapey-poo and Sirius, relatively easy to dispose of. If she did indeed change her mind, then the sudden appearance of the ship would be a way of anchoring him more firmly into the narrative and the greater network of characters. It would, as you suggest, give him an orientation to the present and future, as opposed to the past orientation that he has largely shared with Snapey-poo. Lupinlore From dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 16:38:43 2007 From: dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com (David) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:38:43 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hallows and the Dursleys Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164688 In the back of my mind, I have been wondering if somehow the Dursley's are going to have a key role in the plot in somehow. Will family secrets about Petunia's and Lilly's childhood be revealed? And are the Deatheaters going to use the Dursleys to get at Harry? Dragonkeeper From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 17:07:21 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:07:21 -0000 Subject: And in the end...SS/PS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164689 Celia wrote: > I have been focusing my attentions on PS/SS for the last week or > two, and have compiled these items that I believe (and I know many > of you believe) may be essential to the finale. Carol responds: Thanks very much for starting this thread. I've been thinking of compiling my own list of unanswered questions, starting with things like how the address on the letters to Harry magically changed and how there could be so many. Did McGonagall send out every owl in Hogwarts with a letter to Harry? (Owls can find the recipient of a letter without knowing the address, as we learn in GoF, so maybe the changed address is just an unexplained inconsistency.) > 3. "Dunno if he had enough human left in him to die." (Hagrid, > pg. 57) Hmm, awfully close to horcruxes during the very first > discussion of Voldy! This statement is so close to what we finally > learn to be true 6 books later, I wonder is this just the writing of > a woman who was unsure any more books in the series would be > published? Or does Hagrid know more than he lets on? Or is it common > knowledge that VM is less than human or changed? Seems like a very > accurate statement from Hagrid at this point. I'm keeping my eye on > Hagrid. Carol responds: I agree that Hagrid knows something important, but I think it relates to Snape. As for his words about Voldemort's appearance, he must have known, somehow, what Voldemort looked like before Godric's Hollow, snake-faced and all that. He might even have seen him hanging out at the Hog's Head (one of Hagrid's favorite places, apparently) with his DE pals the night before the DADA interview. (Granted, LV wasn't snake-faced yet but his features were blurred and his eyes were already red. Physically, at least, he was becoming visibly less human. I doubt that Hagrid suspected Horcruxes, but I'll bet that DD did. And if Grindelwald made a single Horcrux, as I suspect, he would know that one Horcrux was insufficient to dehumanize a wizard to the degree that Riddle!Voldemort was already dehumanized.) One point that may be important here: Hagrid was one of the few people besides Dumbledore who knew from the beginning who Voldemort was and had been. (I'm not sure about McGonagall; Snape, of course, was too young to know the pre-Horcrux Voldemort.) Another question I have: Did Hagrid see the scattered remnants of Voldemort alongside the Potters' bodies? Sirius Black says that he saw their bodies and the ruined house; he doesn't mention Voldemort. If Voldie's body was blown to (recognizable) bits, why would anyone (except Dumbledore and maybe Snape) suspect that he wasn't dead? And if it was completely vaporized, how did they know he was the murderer and/or that he hadn't just run away? > 5. Ollivander's eyes, his creepy glassy eyes really stuck out > to me as I was reading today. "Wide, pale eyes, shining like moons > Harry wished he would blink. Those silvery eyes were a bit creepy > Harry could see himself reflected in those misty eyes." (pgs. 82-83) > I am of the belief that Ollivander is not dead, but captive or fled > to Voldemort, and will be important in DH. This description of him > is far more sinister than I remember, and reads to me as someone > hiding things- similar to Snape's glittering eyes. Will Ollivander > be able to alter VM's wand to operate successfully against Harry? > What else might a sinister Ollivander do to alter the possible final > outcome of the books? Where is he? Carol responds: As I said some time ago in another post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/162252 I see Ollivander's silvery eyes as significant but not sinister, and their resemblance to Luna's is intriguing: " . . . Luna's eyes are not within the normal range of eye colors, and their resemblance to Ollivander's is striking. Not only are the eyes silvery, but neither Ollivander or Luna seems to blink, at least not as often as "normal people," as the narrator puts it (reflecting Harry's pov). "I think Ollivander [like Snape, who doesn't blink when he's performing Legilimency} is . . . a Legilimens. Maybe Luna, who seems to be chiefly characterized by her eccentricity and seemingly naive faith in the improbable, is, too." Certainly, Ollivander is powerfully magical (Harry can sense the magic as he stands in the shop, feeling his skin prickle in the presence of all those wands). Just the ability to create a wand must require great skill, and to have created hundreds or thousands or them, each one unique, deliberately geared to, say, Charm work or Transfiguration and otherwise somehow individually suited to a particular wizard, with varying degrees of power, is nothing short of astounding. And he's brilliant as well, remembering every wand he ever made and who it was sold to. He's clearly an associate of Dumbledore's since DD donated two of Fawkes's feathers to him and he has informed Dumbledore of the purchasers' identities. I think he's part of DD's network of spies, but where he is now, I can't guess. I don't think he's making a new wand for Voldie, who's not (IMO) about to give up the precious, powerful yew-and-phoenix-feather wand that has done so many "great but terrible" things (What does Ollivander mean by that? Does he know about the Horcruxes? AK and other unforgiveables qualify as terrible but not great) just because Harry has its mate. He can find other ways of getting around the Priori Incantatem effect (like disarming Harry before murdering him--no more pseudo-civilized duels for LV!) > > 6. Is Quidditch included in the book just for fun, house > rivalry, and reader interest? Is there anything about Quidditch in > this first book in particular that adds to the overall mystery and > fight with VM? Oh, Quidditch Carol: Gag. Quidditch. My least favorite part of the books next to SPEW--and Umbridge's inhuman(e) detentions. Why Quidditch? Well, it gives Harry a chance to see that he's naturally good at something (flying) and to *earn* some celebrity, at least at Hogwarts, in contrast to the unearned celebrity of having survived an AK at the age of fifteen months. The position of Seeker may have symbolic significance (funny that he can see that Golden Snitch so much more clearly than he can see people, maybe because he doesn't need to interpret its motives). It serves as a plot device to get him nearly killed in several books and have his arm bones dissolved in a dazzling display of ineptitude by Gilderoy Lockhart. The loss of his Nimbus 2000 helps to set up the encounter with the Whomping Willow (already introduced in CS) later in PoA and provides Sirius Black with the opportunity of giving Harry a Fireblot (never mind how an escaped convict accessed his bank vault using a cat). It provides an opportunity to illustrate Cedric Diggory's sportsmanship (in contrast to Oliver Wood and other fanatics) before we meet him properly in GoF. It provides an opportunity to highlight Ron's insecurities in contrast with his abilities (unfortunately reiterated in HBP when "Weasley Is Our King" ought to have established once and for all that he was an excellent Keeper). The commentating illustrates the personalities of some minor characters (Lee Jordan, Zacharias Smith, and Luna Lovegood) as well as McGonagall's as overseer (or whatever)--and in Luna's case, it provides some much-needed humor.IMO, Qidditch is primarily a plot device and I'll be glad to see the end of it. > > 7. Alright, a lovely Snape moment that becomes more beautiful > with our wizened HBP eyes: " Snape and Filch were inside, alone. Snape was holding his robe above his knees. There is no reason, really, to be furious with Harry here, within the context of the story- all Harry has seen is that his leg is injured. Is it truly that he is thrown back in time to his "worst memory" by having a Potter see his bare legs? Or in the big picture, where does Snape's fury come from? Carol: I think he's angry with Harry for not minding his own business and he doesn't want him asking questions about the leg or anything else. I don't think it has anything to do with James--and everything to do with Fluffy and the off-limits corridor, where he does not want Harry or his friends (or any student) to be. Of course, I could be wrong, but I think his angry face is just one of those "clues" that Harry misinterprets as "evidence" that Snape is after the stone. > 10. I was thinking about the recent thread about Snape being > fixated the past, or being past- oriented when reading the Mirror of > Erised chapter again. While Harry is able to break free of the hold > his past might have on him in the mirror, in some ways Snape cannot > break away from the past. It seems Snape's life is very much > dictated by fixation on the past (marauders in particular), and that > DD's remark, "It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live," > might apply to Snape, except it would be "dwell on the past." Of > course, it also speaks volumes to what Harry failed to learn in time > for OotP (dreams, Harry! geez ) Carol: I've already responded to Snape's supposed orientation toward his past (which applies to Sirius Black and Lupin as well), but I just wanted to mention in passing another of Harry's dreams (nothing to do with SS?PS). It's interesting how quickly he forgets the details of the Frank Bryce dream (which he considers mentioning to both Sirius Black and Ron and Hermione and decides not to do both times). And the discussion of Bertha Jorkins at the picnic lunch doesn't even jog his memory. If only he had remembered it and told somebody, it's likely that the QWC plan could have been nipped in the bud. But then the book would have lost its plot. (Sorry to stray from SS/PS, but I'm rereading GoF and Harry's hesitation to speak up when the opportunity arises struck me yet again.) Carol, thanking Celia for her thought-provoking post From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 17:36:37 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:36:37 -0000 Subject: Positions in Book 7 Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164690 Pippin wrote: > > She has a number of staff positions to fill, not only DADA but > Transfiguration, Head of Gryffindor, and Deputy Head. Any > guesses whom she might pick, considering that JKR says we've > met all the important characters? > Snow responded: > > Not to mention Potions which is shaky ground considering Dumbledore > is gone and not even Dumbledore could secure the position with > Slughorn the first time round without Harry. > > To get on to the dilemma at hand, I would have to say that Tonks > would be next in line for transfiguration, given her talents. Dada, > however, would be crucial since we are well aware of its downfall. > > Next in line for Headmaster would be even harder than DaDa to forcast! > > And Head of Gryffindor may be harder yet! carol notes: I don't think that Potions will be a problem. I'm sure that Slughorn will return (there's no indication that he won't at the end of HBP). I'm pretty sure that one of DD's considerations in hiring him was to have a Head of House as well as a Potions Master lined up to fill Snape's place when he was ousted by the DADA Curse (which both he and Snape must have known was inevitable). Deputy headmaster/mistress? The logical candidates, IMO, are Sprout and Flitwick, both of them longtime HoHs. Whichever has more seniority would probably get the position. (I'd like to see Sprout get the job just to give the Hufflepuffs some honors, but I have nothing against Flitwick, who would bring a fine sense of fairness to the job.) HoH of Gryffindor is harder. Are any of the teachers at Hogwarts currently Gryffindors other than Hagrid? And would Hagrid be a suitable candidate? Would he even want the job? (No offense to Hagrid defenders. I'm only asking.) It might be easiest to hire a talented Transfiguration teacher who was also a former Gryffindor and kill two birds with one stone. I agree that Tonks would be ther perfect choice. The kids would love her, and her Metamorphmagus abilities would get their attention just as effectively as McG's ability to transform into a cat. I can defintiely see her teaching Transfiguration rather than the cursed DADA position though I realize that she's a talented Auror as well. DADA? Why not put the real Mad-Eye back in the position he was hired for three years earlier? The kids need his protection even more than they did then, and there's no danger of an imposter this time around. That would save JKR the trouble of introducing a new character, too. Carol, betting maybe half a (nonexistent) galleon that at least some of her predictions are correct From chnc1024 at bellsouth.net Tue Feb 6 17:52:42 2007 From: chnc1024 at bellsouth.net (Chancie) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 11:52:42 -0600 Subject: Deadly hollows JKR's "FAVORITE BOOK" of the series! Message-ID: <001a01c74a17$a65b6820$0201a8c0@your4dacd0ea75> No: HPFGUIDX 164691 JKR has FINALLY updated the site saying that Deadly hollows is her FAVORITE book!!! Plus other updates to diary, and rumor sections I can't wait to read this book!!!! Does this put to rest any fears that DH might not live up to expectations? It defiantly does for me! To be honest I think I'm equally happy that once the book is out she can talk freely and answer any nagging questions we still have! Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 17:54:30 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:54:30 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164692 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > > And I have made the point before, but I'll make it again. rather than > worry about the women, I worry about what I think is the very real > lack of strong male/father characters in the story. Well, why don't we just join the two sides and say that there is a notable absence of strong parental/adult figures in general? And yes, it is extremely troubling. > > We have Arthur, who has a spine consisting of three parts jello and > one part spaghetti. That doesn't seem quite fair -- although I understand what you're getting at. Arthur certainly does seem to cede most of the family- type duties to Molly. But then again, that's what Molly is good at and what she likes to do. I wouldn't say that he is spineless so much as he and Molly have worked out a division of responsibility that suits each of them admirably. Whether this is in the best interests of the family as a whole is a matter of debate, I understand. > > We have Lupin, who wouldn't know a strong decision if it bit him in > the behind during a full moon. True, although I think Lupin is a good example of authorial dithering. JKR introduced him in Book III and presumably has something important for him to do in Book VII. Meanwhile she doesn't know quite what to do with him, so he's been kind of hanging around in the background, occasionally making unhelpful comments, piddling around ineffectually, and generally not getting much of anything useful done. Altogether he has been kind of a wet wolf-pelt, hasn't he? > We have Dumbledore, the great light side wizard who couldn't make a > plan, run a war, run a school, or protect a child's interests to save > his life. Rather literally, in fact. Someone who would let an attempted murderer run around in his school is certainly a good example of the Zen values some ascribe to the headmaster. That is, he has achieved the state of Oneness with Idiotic Incompetence. Of course we have authorial meddling here as well. She needed Draco free for the endgame, and the only way she could achieve that was to have DD be an absolutely irresponsible idiot. So much for our "very wise man." > > phoenixgod2000, who has a very low threshold to meet for > characterization out of his love for Robert Howard and Edgar Rice > Burroughs and is still not happy with the characterizations in HP > Chuckle. Well, although Conan, Tarzan, John Carter of Mars, and the rest can be rather one-dimensional, they are at least consistent and true to the way their characters are described. HP characters seem to be genetically related to Gummi Bears. That way they can bend, twist, and deform into whatever improbable and squashed-up shape is needed for the plot. Lupinlore From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 18:01:57 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:01:57 -0000 Subject: Deadly hollows JKR's "FAVORITE BOOK" of the series! In-Reply-To: <001a01c74a17$a65b6820$0201a8c0@your4dacd0ea75> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164693 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chancie" wrote: > > JKR has FINALLY updated the site saying that > Deadly hollows is her FAVORITE book!!! > Does this put to rest any fears that DH might > not live up to expectations? Errrm....no. For one thing JKR also said that HBP was her favorite book since PoA, and that one turned out ... problematic, if not the disaster of OOTP (where she still maintains publically that she can't see anywhere to snip). But, past precedent aside, what else is she going to say? Criticizing your own book before its even published would make no sense at all for any number of reasons, and saying nothing is pretty much impossible given all the hype. So, practically speaking, the only choice she has is to proclaim this is her favorite, that she loves it and hopes everyone else will also, or to take a six-month vacation to study the language of the Emperor Penguin. Lupinlore From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 6 19:09:39 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:09:39 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164694 Lupinlore: > Rather literally, in fact. Someone who would let an attempted > murderer run around in his school is certainly a good example of the > Zen values some ascribe to the headmaster. That is, he has achieved > the state of Oneness with Idiotic Incompetence. Of course we have > authorial meddling here as well. She needed Draco free for the > endgame, and the only way she could achieve that was to have DD be an > absolutely irresponsible idiot. So much for our "very wise man." Magpie: I think that's a bit of a distortion in this case. Authorial meddling suggests that she's stepped in to keep the logical result of her own plot from happening. For example, the way Quidditch outcomes never seem predictable based on anything besides how JKR wants the Gryffindors to win this time. What you're describing makes it seem like Draco's free because Rowling stepped in to make DD unable to catch him, so he can't be very wise. But I think it's obvious Dumbledore's choice to keep Draco free is supposed to be wisdom. One can certainly argue with the idea, but it's not authorial meddling that makes that happen, it's a choice by Dumbledore that we're supposed to presumably eventually come to see the wisdom of--the very essence of his character and wisdom. It's no more authorial meddling that it was to have Sirius mastermind The Prank. It's what this character is all about. -m From no1nanafor5 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 18:24:29 2007 From: no1nanafor5 at yahoo.com (sally sullivan) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 10:24:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ron and Hermione Message-ID: <126446.49389.qm@web52615.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164695 I believe that Ron and Hermione will be friends, but as for a solitary union [wedding], it would not work out. Ron is just too jealous for her, and she might be outspoken and brave, but very sensitive. Personally I think that she is well suited for Krum, and he, her. A lot of people have a lot of hope that this will be so. Thank you for listening. NANA no1nanafor5 at yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 19:46:41 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:46:41 -0000 Subject: Deadly hollows JKR's "FAVORITE BOOK" of the series!/updates on website In-Reply-To: <001a01c74a17$a65b6820$0201a8c0@your4dacd0ea75> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164696 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chancie" wrote: > > JKR has FINALLY updated the site saying that > Deadly hollows is her FAVORITE book!!! > Plus other updates to diary, and rumor sections > I can't wait to read this book!!!! > > Does this put to rest any fears that DH might > not live up to expectations? It defiantly does > for me! To be honest I think I'm equally happy > that once the book is out she can talk freely > and answer any nagging questions we still > have! > Alla: What I found interesting that she confirmed IMO that the meaning of Hallows is crucial for the story and she refused to explain it. She also refused to explain two other titles, she considered, which makes me almost sure that they are crucial for the story as well. "Please will you tell us what were the other two titles you considered? You asked so politely, and yet I have to decline... maybe after publication..." "What does 'Deathly Hallows' mean? Any clarification of the meaning of 'Hallows' would give away too much of the story - well, it would, wouldn't it? Being the title and all. So I'm afraid I'm not answering." Alla: So, what were those other titles supposedly copyrighted couple years ago? Or was that a decoy or joke? Were "Hosts of Hogwarts" amongst them or did I dream it up? I think it is pretty much a given that Harry's beloved dead would help him somehow. IMO of course. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 20:21:55 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:21:55 -0000 Subject: Deadly hollows JKR's "FAVORITE BOOK" of the series! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164697 > > Chancie: > > JKR has FINALLY updated the site saying that > > Deadly hollows is her FAVORITE book!!! > > > > > Does this put to rest any fears that DH might > > not live up to expectations? > > lupinlore: > Errrm....no. For one thing JKR also said that HBP was her favorite > book since PoA, and that one turned out ... problematic, if not the > disaster of OOTP (where she still maintains publically that she can't > see anywhere to snip). zgirnius: Thanks for the reminder of her comment about HBP. Now I'm *REALLY* excited about DH, since HBP is my favorite of the bunch. > lupinlore: > So, practically speaking, the > only choice she has is to proclaim this is her favorite, that she > loves it and hopes everyone else will also, or to take a six-month > vacation to study the language of the Emperor Penguin. zgirnius: There are tons of positive things she could say that aren't 'it is my favorite': "I love how it wraps up the series". "I love the ending." "I think the fans will be thrilled with all the answers to their burning questions" etc. From entangledhere at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 20:08:10 2007 From: entangledhere at yahoo.com (Sunny) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 12:08:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Deathly Hallows and the Dursleys Message-ID: <57091.68612.qm@web51414.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164698 > >>Dragonkeeper: <<>> Dragonkeeper, I think that Voldemort knows enough about Harry to know that he isn't very close to the Dursleys, and therefore, cannot truly be hurt by the loss of them, though I'm sure that Harry, just because he's a good person, would try to protect them. But why go after them when Harry is VERY close to the Weasleys, etc.? Lily's childhood secrets will definitely be revealed. I think she and Snape were a bit of an item there for awhile, which will be much to Harry's despair. As for Petunia, eh. I think we'll find out about her correspondence with Dumbledore. And it's possible that Dudley is the one who performs magic late in life, though it's more likely that it's Filch. Just guessing! *Sunny* We are the music makers. We are the dreamers of the dreams. http://www.sunnychristian.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From marilynpeake at cs.com Tue Feb 6 21:45:56 2007 From: marilynpeake at cs.com (Marilyn Peake) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:45:56 -0000 Subject: J.K. Rowling Comments on Completing the Series Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164699 J.K. Rowling has a very moving post on her website about how it feels to complete the Harry Potter series: http://www.jkrowling.com Best Wishes, Marilyn http://www.marilynpeake.com From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Feb 6 21:53:22 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:53:22 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164700 Alla: > > I believe that for example her adding up the portraits of > Headmistresses to be in the same area as DD speech in OOP. I believe > that she wanted to defend herself, etc. I wish she would not. I do > not see WW as modern society at all. I think that if she wanted to > write about patriarchal society, because it suits her story better, > she should have been strong enough to stick to it. > Hickengruendler: I am not sure about this. After all, two of the four Hogwarts founders were women. Granted, it are the two of the less important houses (for the storyline, I mean), but still. The wizarding world is a society, where witches could found schools even more than a thousand years ago. Therefore it does not seem very patriarchal in it's roots. I guess it's one reason, why I was not suprised by the female ministers and headmistresses, who suddenly appeared everywhere starting with OotP. To me, they fit in this world and the picture I made about it in the first four books, even if we met only male in important roles. About strong female characters: Frankly, I think the problem is, that JKR and some of her readers have a different opinion about what a strong female character is. Prior to even the release of GoF she was asked, why she didn't include some strong female characters in the books, and she at once mentioned McGonagall and Hermione. I think she sees McGonagall as a strong female character, because McGonagall is a very capable witch, with a forceful personality and lots of spice behind her somewhat frosty exterior. While the readers mean with strong female characters well layered femeale characters (actually, I think McGonagall is pretty well layered, more so than Sirius or Dumbledore, but I have found out long ago, that I'm in the minority with this), and really conflicted one, with a thrilling past or many different sides. So I don't think JKR ever lied about including strong female characters, she just has a different opinion about what a strong female character is. Hickengruendler From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 21:56:42 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:56:42 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164701 > >>Jen: > > I think it genuinely perplexes JKR to be accused of not having > strong female characters when I really believe she's saying that > women's strengths, long denigrated by society, are actually THE > most important part of the story: 'What do they mean? Lily? Luna? > Molly? Hermione? Trelawney? All have contributed to the cause by > using skills society has traditionally deemed inferior simply > because they are traditonally tied to women's roles, and I'm saying > in some cases their strengths have actually done *more* than what > the males at the MOM or guys like Harry, Sirius, James or even > Dumbledore have been able to accomplish at certain critical > junctures. > Betsy Hp: (I'm kind of jumping in here, because I'm not sure where else to get in on this thread. But I'm not sure I actually address your issues, Jen. Or, maybe I do. Gah, isn't this the best way to start a post ever?) I know for me a huge issue is that I rather dislike JKR's female characters. Some of them I actively despise. I think Molly is a perfect example of the vileness of small-minded, stupid, shrill, emotional, little people who should never have been allowed so much power of young children. That Arthur left Molly with so much control over their family home is one of his biggest flaws, IMO. (Unlike Dumbledore, Arthur has no excuse but personal weakness.) This is a visceral reaction, and I know that it's not a popular one. But there it is. So rather than a need for a "strong" female character, I guess I'm just looking for a *likable* one. Honestly, I don't think JKR is any good at writing females. She either goes for the funny stereotype, like McGonogall, or the super!strong!wonder!chick like Ginny. I think JKR is good at the stereotype. Just as she does with the Flitwicks and Slughorns, she creates very amusing and recognizable caricatures in Trelawny and McGonagall. None of those characters are very deep necessarily, but they're well-drawn and amusing. It's when JKR decides to enter "strong female character" territory that she falls flat, IMO. Instead of the hints of interest we get with say Sirius or Lupin or even Zach Smith, we get best quidditch player (practiced at night!) ever so pretty (but never tries to be!) sooo funny (mean is witty!) Ginny. Or punk yet pathetic Tonks. [At least, that's how it seems to be going. I could be (I hope I am) wrong. DH could change everything by making Ginny less perfect. (I still think Molly is supposed to be at least a tiny bit annoying instead of stand in for perfect motherhood, so I let that bit go.) And if Hermione goes through some growth I'll probably end up okay with the series. (And believe me, my fingers are crossed.)] But I don't think books need to have strong female characters to be good. In fact, I think it was going for "strong female" that tripped JKR up. So it's not (for me, anyway) a political issue. It's more of a... likability issue. > >>Phoenixgod: > Betsy, I agree with you post completely!(I don't feel right, quick, > say something nice about Snape or Draco) Betsy Hp: Um... so far I think both of them have (or had) okay moms? > >>Phoenixgod: > But I would go even a step further. This is a story about a boy > without a father, and ultimately, how Harry deals with his > unresolved father and the other men in his life is far more > important than how he deals with the women in his life. At least in > my opinion. > > And I have made the point before, but I'll make it again. rather > than worry about the women, I worry about what I think is the very > real lack of strong male/father characters in the story. Betsy Hp: See, this is where I think JKR's feminism may be biting her on the ass. (I'm still thinking this through, so please feel free to change my mind, fellow listies. ) I think JKR *is* interested in fatherhood, etc. I think that's a big reason why Harry is a boy and why all of the characters that most touch his life are men, potentional father-figures that never quite get it right. (Dumbledore always seemed too detached to play anything other than a grandfatherly role, IMO.) But even with their failures (and I agree, for the most part, with your list of examples, Phoenixgod) each man brings *something* noteworthy to the table. Which is why fandom has so much fun dissecting the various male characters' strengths and weaknesses. They are all tragic heroes in their own ways. So close to goodness and nobleness except for one tragic flaw that keeps tripping them up. (Neediness on Lupin's part, emotionalism on Sirius's, etc.) But I think JKR wasn't able to intellectually leave it at that and felt compelled to bring mothers into the fray. Only for whatever reason JKR isn't able to naturally write about mothers in the same way she's able to write about fathers. So it all becomes a bit forced. Lily is a Saint, McGonogall is the perfect "strict teacher", etc. But neither of them *really* touch Harry's life, because they just aren't real. They're plaster stand-ins, especially when compared to the guys. Honestly, I think in many ways Molly is the most real of JKR's "mother" creations. She just happens to encapsulate some of the worst aspects of motherhood. Interestingly enough, Molly has very little impact in Harry's life, I think. And I think because it would highlight Molly's weaknesses too much, fandom doesn't discuss Arthur with the same vigor they bring to Sirius or Lupin discussions. Instead we have the OBHWF phenomenon (One Big Happy Weasley Family), when really, the Weasleys never struck me as all that happy to begin with. (Generally, happy families don't end up disowning a child.) Eh, I think I'm probably rambling a bit. But I do think it comes down to JKR being willing to dig her hands into the muck of fatherhood, while keeping motherhood safely perched on a rose leaf: perfect and indefinable and therefore a tiny bit fake. Betsy Hp From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Feb 6 22:39:38 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:39:38 -0000 Subject: Deadly hollows JKR's "FAVORITE BOOK" of the series!. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164702 "lupinlore" wrote: > Errrm....no. For one thing JKR also > said that HBP was her favorite book > since PoA, and that one turned out > ... problematic There is no disputing matters of taste, but I loved HBP. In that regard I don't think I'm an oddball (in other respects maybe but not in that one). In the most sincere sort of opinion poll possible, the sort where you vote with your dollars, a case could made that HBP has been enjoyed by more people than any book since Gutenberg invented his press 550 years ago; after all, nobody really enjoys reading the Bible or The Quotations Of Chairman Mao. > what else is she going to say? Well, she could say what she said about book 4, that she wrote it in only 10 months and it might have been better if she had more time. Or she could say what she said about book 5, that it was overlong (I disagree with her about that). Or she could say what she said about book 3, that it was the easiest of all her books to write but there seems to be an inverse relationship between ease in writing and the quality of writing. Or she could say what she said about book 2, that halfway through it she suffered writers block for the only time in her life. Or she could say what she said about book 6, that some people won't like it. Or she could say that after finishing book 7 she might go back to book 1 and rewrite the entire series because she thinks she's a better writer now than she was a decade ago. The most severe book critic of JKR is JKR. When that same severe critic says it's the best book in the series I don't believe it is just a marketing gimmick, she already has more money than God, I believe it is her sincere opinion. Well sure she could be wrong about that, but I can't just ignore that opinion with a wave of my hand, it means something. Eggplant From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Tue Feb 6 21:30:26 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 16:30:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:The Deathly Hallows and the Dursleys References: <57091.68612.qm@web51414.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000f01c74a36$06c9db10$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164703 >> ----- Original Message ----- From: Sunny Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:The Deathly Hallows and the Dursleys I think that Voldemort knows enough about Harry to know that he isn't very close to the Dursleys, and therefore, cannot truly be hurt by the loss of them, though I'm sure that Harry, just because he's a good person, would try to protect them. But why go after them when Harry is VERY close to the Weasleys, etc.? Lily's childhood secrets will definitely be revealed. I think she and Snape were a bit of an item there for awhile, which will be much to Harry's despair. As for Petunia, eh. I think we'll find out about her correspondence with Dumbledore. And it's possible that Dudley is the one who performs magic late in life, though it's more likely that it's Filch. Just guessing!<< --My Comments-- Harry wouldn't be as hurt by the loss of a Dursley, but Voldemort may feel that Harry is more vulnerable at the Dursley's because there, he is alone. They are only muggles and even though related by blood, they don't even seem to like one another. Although, hurting a Weasley would probably hurt Harry much more, as you said. I also believe that there was something between Lily and Snape at one time. Even if it were unrequited, it would explain a lot about Snape. Somebody had said that Snape HATED Lily, but I've never seen any evidence of this. In fact, the fact that he rants on and on at times about James, Sirius, Lupin, etc. But leaves her out causes me suspicion. The only time I can even recall Snape speaking about Lily is when Harry saw them in the pensieve and Lily stood up for Snape. He called her a Mudblood. But then, he had just been humiliated and I don't consider that conclusive evidence that he hated her. Most people, including Harry himself, hurt the ones we love at some point by speaking out of rage. At any rate, certain rumors have been confirmed by JKR. One of them was that we would learn something we didn't know about Lily. Among the rumors that have been confirmed, there is something we are going to find out about Petunia and it's also mentioned that someone who is not magical will perform magic. I don't think it will be Petunia and your theories make sense, but I do hope it's neither of those two. Maybe, Mrs. Figg? There are a ton of informitive quotes from JKR on http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/#book:7 if you look at the Book FAQ. I would quote it all here, but I'm not sure if that's acceptable, so I'll have to consult with the list elf. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From twowaykid2525 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 6 23:06:22 2007 From: twowaykid2525 at yahoo.com (mitchell) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:06:22 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164704 WOW!!! A lot of you guys on here I'm noticing are giving A LOT of negativity to Minerva!! I think McGonagall is one of the best written characters in the story!! She is a strong woman! She believes in rules, order, and fairness. But this isn't all she's about. Under her stern stance she's deeply compassionate, caring, understanding, and insightful. Her reactions to Umbridge were some of the most realistic and best written parts of the book, IMO!! Who out there can't say they couldn't see her praying for patience everytime Umbridge coughed! She's VERY belivable! I think some people mistake DD not informing her of every detail of his plans and her tough outer shell as her not having any depth. I believe that McGonagall will have a HUGE role to play in DH. She cares for Harry and Hogwarts just as much as any other person close to Harry. Mitchell From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 00:13:22 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:13:22 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164705 > Betsy Hp: > So rather than a need for a "strong" female character, I guess I'm > just looking for a *likable* one. Honestly, I don't think JKR is any > good at writing females. She either goes for the funny stereotype, > like McGonogall, or the super!strong!wonder!chick like Ginny. zgirnius: I think you need to consider the possibility that your aesthetic sensibilities and JKR's simply don't mesh in this area. Until HBP, Hermione was my favorite character. (I was not at all turned off by her in HBP, she just loses out to Snape now.) I will be the first to agree that she is not perfect (as a person, not a not character), which is part of her appeal. I don't find her to be a stereotype, but a very particular person with her own distinctive set of traits and interests. Other female characters I can honestly say I like very much are Molly Weasley and Professor McGonagall. Other female characters I find interesting, without considering them jugely likable, include Luna Lovegood (I am to much a Hermione myself to *really* like Luna) and Narcissa Malfoy (she's a 'black hat', for me that's an obstacle). This is not really an area one can debate, since you can hardly deny that these characters are likable to me, and thus could hypothetically be likable to any number of other people whose likes are closer to mine than to yours. BetsyHP: > It's when JKR decides to enter "strong female character" territory > that she falls flat, IMO. zgirnius: I consider McGonagall to be a member of the strong female characters club. What's not strong about her? Ditto Hermione, and Molly. BetsyHP: > (I > still think Molly is supposed to be at least a tiny bit annoying > instead of stand in for perfect motherhood, so I let that bit go.) > And if Hermione goes through some growth I'll probably end up okay > with the series. (And believe me, my fingers are crossed.)] zgirnius: Oh, since I love Molly, I agree, she does not stand in for perfect motherhood. Why should she? That would make her a stereotype. Sure, she is occasionally annoying. So are some of the people in RL with whom I have the closest emotional ties. This does not make her unlikable to me, or a weak female character. > Betsy Hp: > So it all becomes a bit > forced. Lily is a Saint, McGonogall is the perfect "strict teacher", > etc. But neither of them *really* touch Harry's life, because they > just aren't real. They're plaster stand-ins, especially when > compared to the guys. zgirnius: We can't even call Lily a plaster stand in. What we (and Harry) know of her and her friends is dwarfed by what is known of James and his friends. Other than the obvious impact on his life (he's still alive!) she hasn't had a chance to affect Harry. This is an area in which I really think it is premature to judge Rowling before DH, because Lily is at the center of the biggest mystery in the series (what happened in GH). We will be learning more about her. What impact, if any, Harry's discoveries about her will make on him remains unclear. > BestyHP: > Honestly, I think in many ways Molly is the most real of > JKR's "mother" creations. She just happens to encapsulate some of > the worst aspects of motherhood. Interestingly enough, Molly has > very little impact in Harry's life, I think. And I think because it > would highlight Molly's weaknesses too much, fandom doesn't discuss > Arthur with the same vigor they bring to Sirius or Lupin > discussions. zgirnius: I always thought this is because, unlike Molly, Arthur is boring. Sirius and Lupin were cool kids in school, Sirius is a big tragic figure and much loved by Harry, and Lupin...OK, I get less why he is supposed to be so interesting, unless Pippin is right, and the blandness is an act concealing a villain. And he has certainly not had a real impact on Harry's life. He's a nice teacher who has taught Harry some stuff and told him some things about his father. From megan.real at excite.com Wed Feb 7 00:21:47 2007 From: megan.real at excite.com (poohmeg20) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:21:47 -0000 Subject: The Deathly Hallows and the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <000f01c74a36$06c9db10$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164706 Ronin_47 wrote: > I also believe that there was something between Lily and Snape at one time. Even if it were unrequited, it would explain a lot about Snape. > > Among the rumors that have been confirmed, there is something we are going to find out about Petunia and it's also mentioned that someone who is not magical will perform magic. > Megan Responds: Snape is going to be important in DH, and we know that Harry will have to go back to the Dursleys at least briefly, so I think there is going to be some connection revealed between Snape and Petunia. It may have been romantic - jealousy of Snape's love of Lily would explain many things about Petunia's personality and attitudes - and it seems clear that Petunia knows more about the WW than she lets on. JKR has said that Aunt Petunia has never been able to perform magic and never will be, but she must have had some knowledge of Lily's life at Hogwarts and probably had the opportunity to meet some of her classmates and/or fellow Order members. Since a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, it's possible that she could have been tricked into inadvertantly helping LV in some way, which could have brought her into contact with Snape either while he was a DE or after he switched sides. Her agreement with DD may have come out of him having to intervene in whatever happened next. Ever since the beginning I have felt some connection between Petunia and Snape - there are many similarities between the way JKR describes them physically as being thin with angled features, and even though they express it differently sometimes they both share a distrust of other people and have many insecurities based on a desire to fit into the world they want to be in but see themselves on the edge of (Snape wants to hide his half-blood background, Petunia wants to be the muggliest Muggle ever). It seems like too much of a coincidence for these two unpleasant yet not evil people to both be built up as major pieces of the final book without having some connection to one another. From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Feb 7 00:25:11 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 17:25:11 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] J.K. Rowling Comments on Completing the Series References: Message-ID: <01af01c74a4e$6e1b5ce0$c0affea9@MOBILE> No: HPFGUIDX 164707 > Marilyn says: > J.K. Rowling has a very moving post on her website about how it feels > to complete the Harry Potter series: > http://www.jkrowling.com That, and a new rumour. (which, btw, doesn't refute the 7's theory, because she talks about the 7/7 date and the 7/21 date) To even think she considered giving in to fans with the 7/7/07 is something I find facinating. I love this woman! Shelley From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Wed Feb 7 01:13:18 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 17:13:18 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] J.K. Rowling Comments on Completing the Series In-Reply-To: <01af01c74a4e$6e1b5ce0$c0affea9@MOBILE> References: <01af01c74a4e$6e1b5ce0$c0affea9@MOBILE> Message-ID: <948bbb470702061713v5d89c9e7x85310ce6ed488595@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164708 > Marilyn says: > J.K. Rowling has a very moving post on her website about how it feels > to complete the Harry Potter series: > http://www.jkrowling.com That, and a new rumour. (which, btw, doesn't refute the 7's theory, because she talks about the 7/7 date and the 7/21 date) To even think she considered giving in to fans with the 7/7/07 is something I find facinating. I love this woman! Shelley ----------------------------------- Jeremiah: Shelly, exactly where does she talk about the 7/7 date? I read her site, too and I have failed to find the material you are talking about. In the Rumors page (key word: rumors) she bring it up as an example and says that such a date would have the book being rushed. 2 weeks more and it seems just fine. Sure, it looks strange, but I can't tell you the amount of things I could get done in 2 weeks... and I'm sure all the professionals working on this last book are able to get a million and one things done in that amount of time. My heart goes out to the 7/7-lovers out there. You're all going to have to live with 7/21. (I hope you all find ways to move on if you haven't already). Bless your little hearts. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 01:17:36 2007 From: dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com (dragonkeeper) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 17:17:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Deathly Hallows and the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <677685.12341.qm@web53310.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164709 I was reading that Harry having Lily's eyes were important. With all the speculation about Snape and Lily, I was wondering if part of it was the reason for Snape's behavior since the first time he saw Harry. I wonder if Snape also noticed Lily's apeareance in Harry because he sure recognizes James's behavior in Harry. Dragonkeeper From cdayr at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 01:48:10 2007 From: cdayr at yahoo.com (cdayr) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 01:48:10 -0000 Subject: Positions in Book 7 Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164710 > Pippin wrote: > > > > She has a number of staff positions to fill, not only DADA but > > Transfiguration, Head of Gryffindor, and Deputy Head. Any > > guesses whom she might pick, considering that JKR says we've > > met all the important characters? > carol notes: > HoH of Gryffindor is harder. Are any of the teachers at Hogwarts > currently Gryffindors other than Hagrid? And would Hagrid be a > suitable candidate? Would he even want the job? (No offense to Hagrid > defenders. I'm only asking.) It might be easiest to hire a talented > Transfiguration teacher who was also a former Gryffindor and kill two > birds with one stone. I agree that Tonks would be ther perfect choice. > The kids would love her, and her Metamorphmagus abilities would get > their attention just as effectively as McG's ability to transform into > a cat. I can defintiely see her teaching Transfiguration rather than > the cursed DADA position though I realize that she's a talented Auror > as well. This entire thread has me thinking about teacher preparation and training in the WW. In RL, teaching itself is a profession one chooses- it has specific skills, knowledge and philosophy required and is a calling. Some are drawn to a very specific subject, but others, like myself, are drawn to the profession and the subject taught is secondary. In fact, as an elementary teacher, I teach everything. It is interesting to me (and I'd never thought about it before today) that all of the teachers that we know well at Hogwart's are entirely subject specific- as far as we know they were hired because they are good at the branch of magic that they teach (and hey, most of their names match their fields too ). Even in discussing possible replacements, as in this thread, the only candidates we have are working professionals in other fields (Tonks), or someone well meaning who just happens to be around (Hagrid), who would, we can only hope, be able to relate at all to children and teach at some basic level. Now, this is not a rock-solid argument at all...for all we know, Flitwick and Vector and Sinistra are all teaching professionals first and experts in their field second. But really, the faculty of Hogwart's reminds me more of a faculty at a university than a secondary school (meaning faculty who are into their subjects, and have to teach as part of the ability to work with their subject all the time- some being skilled teachers, and some not so much). And let's see...Trelawney is there for protection, Snape to be a double agent, let's not even start with DADA...where are the Teachers? Maybe I'm just feeling a bit defensive of my profession that any old person with a Gryffindor background and skill at transfiguration might be the new teacher (by the way, this is defensive towards the possible new teacher selection in DH, not towards Carol, who I think is right on in her post). I do think a number of the teacher's at Hogwart's are excellent, in very different ways, and certainly we know a number of them are sub- par. In my view this is one of the most realistic things about the entire series- this highly esteemed school having a number of middling or poor teachers and several who come and go. However, at some point, can't the Head of School just post an ad and get some darn *teaching* candidates in, instead of just convenient replacements? Sorry for the rant, truly directed at no one but felt good anyway. > Carol, betting maybe half a (nonexistent) galleon that at least some of her predictions are correct Celia- who wouldn't take that bet, because I think you would win! From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 03:01:34 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 03:01:34 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164711 > >>Betsy Hp: > > So rather than a need for a "strong" female character, I guess > > I'm just looking for a *likable* one. > > > >>zgirnius: > I think you need to consider the possibility that your aesthetic > sensibilities and JKR's simply don't mesh in this area. > Betsy Hp: Oh, I have! I really do wonder if it's just that JKR and I disagree on what makes a good and likable person. And honestly, it might just be that simple. It'll be too bad, because I'll have very little reason to reread or recommend the books, but thems the breaks. It's just... I'm still not quite *sure*. I mean, I do honestly recognize that Molly is much more nails on the chalkboard for me than for others. But I still think JKR purposefully writes her as off- putting at times. (There's a reason JKR chose to have Molly annoy rather than soothe Harry before his big trial in GoF.) But are we (the readers) supposed to notice Hermione heading down a bad path? Or does JKR think Hermione is doing great and nothing will change? I don't know! And it frustrates the heck out of me. It's interesting, because I've just read a story told by two very different narrators, and one is instantly very sympathetic, start to finish, you love him no matter what. But the other narrator is so much more off-putting. For one, he's mad through most of the story, but even when he gets himself together he's incredibly self-centered and even selfish. But I recognize that this is *meant* to be off- putting. The narrator sees some (not all of course) of his issues and so there's a sense that he's got something more to offer and a change will occur. So I'm quite willing to give him time to become likable (though I've read reviews where others weren't as patient). With Hermione though, I worry that it's a waste of time. This is who she is, because this is what JKR herself thinks is good. So it prevents me (at this point) from becoming too invested, from hoping too much. Probably a big part of it is that neither Hermione nor Harry nor Ron seem to see that there's a problem. I mean if none of them think Hermione is getting a bit scary then what do I hang my hat on as hope that she'll improve? > >>zgirnius: > I consider McGonagall to be a member of the strong female > characters club. What's not strong about her? Betsy Hp: I think with McGonagall, it's not that she's not a person of strength (after all, she's the "strict but fair" teacher, can't be a weakling in that role ), but more that she's not a strong influence in Harry's life and therefore to the story. So she's not a make or break part of the story like say, Sirius or Lupin are. > >>zgirnius: > Ditto Hermione, and Molly. Betsy Hp: Hermione is strong. I think she's JKR's one exception. My worry with Hermione goes back to likability. I don't like Hermione (as she is now), don't admire her, etc. So again, aesthetics, as you said. I will admit that I'm always shocked when people say Molly is strong. She can't even keep her own child from being thrown out of her home. What's strong about that? [Frankly, IMO, Molly is the perfect example of the worst sort of female weakness: everything for a man who's no longer all that interested; sublimating all of her rage and choked ambition into cruel and meaningless mind games with the weakest of her offspring as a stand in for the man she's losing. That most of it is subconscious makes her even more pathetic, IMO. But that's just me, and I fully realize that I'm pretty much alone on this. ] > >>Betsy Hp: > > ...I think because it would highlight Molly's weaknesses > > too much, fandom doesn't discuss Arthur with the same vigor they > > bring to Sirius or Lupin discussions. > >>zgirnius: > I always thought this is because, unlike Molly, Arthur is boring. > Betsy Hp: Arthur is boring because he's almost never there. Because Molly has driven him out of the house and he's too weak to fight his way back in. No matter how his children suffer. But Arthur is one of the few characters who treats Harry as a thinking person in his own right (against Molly's wishes and behind her back, of course). And he has some strong principles (not shared by Molly) that I think the WW need to consider. And, IMO, Arthur, delt the best with the Dursleys and may have been the only one to actually shame them (until the twins of course, Molly's little helpers). So I do think there's something interesting there, along with something cripplingly weak. Like the rest of the male cast. > >>Betsy Hp: > > So it all becomes a bit forced. Lily is a Saint, McGonogall is > > the perfect "strict teacher", etc. But neither of them *really* > > touch Harry's life, because they just aren't real. They're > > plaster stand-ins, especially when compared to the guys. > >>zgirnius: > We can't even call Lily a plaster stand in. > Betsy Hp: Oh, I think Lily makes a perfect saintly figurine: perfect, untouchable, unknowable. Better than any mere human could ever hope to be. > >>zgirnius: > > This is an area in which I really think it is premature to judge > Rowling before DH, because Lily is at the center of the biggest > mystery in the series (what happened in GH). We will be learning > more about her. What impact, if any, Harry's discoveries about her > will make on him remains unclear. Betsy Hp: You could well be right. Though given how JKR has already handled Ginny, especially if we're supposed to take Ginny as done, I really do fear that we're going to be faced with an impossibly perfect woman who's only flaws are of the irreproachable kind, a slight temper with forces of evil, etc. But, even if Lily does turn out to be a gift of a character, I almost wonder if she's not being shoved in a bit too late? I mean, I'm all for leaving motherhood alone so we can tackle fatherhood. Is JKR attempting to pile too much on her plate, I wonder? Certainly there've been no Lily representatives as there've been James representatives. (I think part of the reason the pensieve scene caused James to more click into place than thud is because of what we already knew about the Maraurders.) And what I also wonder about is that Lily may be something that makes *Snape* more clear to both the readers and Harry. So rather than revealing motherhood, we've again learned something about fatherhood. Betsy Hp (I rearranged some of the post to aid the flow) From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 7 01:45:17 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 20:45:17 -0500 Subject: The Deathly Hallows and the Dursleys References: Message-ID: <000f01c74a59$a6f5f470$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164712 >> ----- Original Message ----- From: poohmeg20 To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 7:21 PM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:The Deathly Hallows and the Dursleys Ever since the beginning I have felt some connection between Petunia and Snape - there are many similarities between the way JKR describes them physically as being thin with angled features, and even though they express it differently sometimes they both share a distrust of other people and have many insecurities based on a desire to fit into the world they want to be in but see themselves on the edge of (Snape wants to hide his half-blood background, Petunia wants to be the muggliest Muggle ever). It seems like too much of a coincidence for these two unpleasant yet not evil people to both be built up as major pieces of the final book without having some connection to one another. << --My comments-- Now that you mention it, I've never really payed much attention to those similarities, but you're right. It could very well be. Imagine what the children will look like? lol I read that we would learn something about Lily and something about Petunia as well. I also remember reading that someone who's never performed magic before will perform it, but that Petunia never has and never will perform magic. Something to do with her correspondence with Dumbledore will be explained though. I'm just beginning to re-read HBP and noticed the bit about Harry wondering why DD referred to correspondences, rather than the one letter. If it was important enough for Harry to think about in that instance, I'm sure it will be signifigant somehow. I was thinking along the lines that perhaps Snape was obsessed with Lily or they had even dated. Maybe he was brought around and met Petunia. (Not unlike Harry and Ginny) Could be he had started as friends with Lily before she started hanging with James and that crowd. Maybe she started to ditch him for her new gang and he got closer to Petunia in an attempt to either make Lily jealous or to stay close to Lily. Then maybe they hit it off. Whatever the case turns out to be, I agree that there is certainly a lot to think about here. There is more to Petunia than meets the eye and certainly, Snape is going to be a substantial part of it. OMG...Maybe Kreacher is Snape's & Petunia's! (just joking) Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 7 02:10:35 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 21:10:35 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:The Deathly Hallows and the Dursleys References: <677685.12341.qm@web53310.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001e01c74a5d$27e87c30$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164713 >> ----- Original Message ----- From: dragonkeeper To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:17 PM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:The Deathly Hallows and the Dursleys I was reading that Harry having Lily's eyes were important. With all the speculation about Snape and Lily, I was wondering if part of it was the reason for Snape's behavior since the first time he saw Harry. I wonder if Snape also noticed Lily's apeareance in Harry because he sure recognizes James's behavior in Harry.<< --My comments-- This is exactly what I've been thinking. It seems that when Snape sees Harry, he loathes him for his similarities to James. Yet, he is always protecting him even when Harry assumes Snape is behind all of his woes. (I.E. - In PS/SS, Harry assumed that Snape was after the stone when he was actually protecting it. Hermione assumed that Snape was jinxing Harry off his broom when he was actually working a counter jinx.) And likewise, when Harry saw Snape for the first time he didn't like Snape. I think it had a lot to do with his impression of Slytherin after meeting Draco Malfoy for the first time. Harry having Lily's eyes is something I've wondered about for a long time. Lupin really seemed to make a big fuss about it. I'm pretty sure Hagrid mentioned it at the beginning as well. I just wonder whether it's not something more than a physical likeness. Like having her blood. On a completely different note, I wonder if there will be any signifigance to the Phoenix and all of that symbolism or if it was all just to throw us off. What will become of Fawkes with Dumbledore gone? It seems that there was a lot made of the phoenix's power to rise from the ashes and even the fact that the order takes it's name from the phoenix. There seem to be many other powers associated with it which Dumbledore put to use often, maybe even an entirely different kind of magic. In a way, I can't wait until July to get some of the questions answered. But on the other hand, I'd rather it weren't the end. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kat7555 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 02:23:15 2007 From: kat7555 at yahoo.com (kat7555) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 02:23:15 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164714 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mitchell" wrote: >> >> I think McGonagall is one of the best written characters in the story!! She is a strong woman! She believes in rules, order, and fairness. But this isn't all she's about. Under her stern stance she's deeply compassionate, caring, understanding, and insightful. Her reactions to Umbridge were some of the most realistic and best written parts of the book, IMO!! << I like McGonagall as well. She reminds me of teachers I've had IRL. I think Dumbledore doesn't confide in her because he knows she will find flaws in his plans. She was skeptical of his plan to leave Harry with the Dursleys and her instincts were right on IMO. Her argument with Umbridge regarding Harry's future was one of the highlights of the Order of the Phoenix. Kathy From jnoyl at aim.com Wed Feb 7 04:06:40 2007 From: jnoyl at aim.com (James Lyon) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 21:06:40 -0700 Subject: Positions in Book 7 Message-ID: <9B9B67DB-E2AA-4FA1-9337-1FD68A807AEA@aim.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164715 The first issue is will there be a school in book 7? Any good fighters will be needed for the war (unless JK has Moldie sit back and relax for most of the hunt time). Fleur could be brought in (she isn't much of a fighter, given her performance in the TWT. Bill might be able to teach charms or DADA. James Lyon. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 04:55:51 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 04:55:51 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164716 > Betsy Hp: > But are we (the readers) supposed to notice Hermione heading down a > bad path? Or does JKR think Hermione is doing great and nothing will > change? I don't know! And it frustrates the heck out of me. zgirnius: I guess to me it does not matter. Hermione has a self-righteous streak which makes her sometimes ineffective (SPEW) and sometimes cruel (Marietta), but it is not something I would call a fatal flaw. It doesn't make her evil, in my opinion anyway. I will be equally happy if she somehow comes to see the problem, or if she continues this way. BetsyHP: > I mean if none of > them think Hermione is getting a bit scary then what do I hang my hat on as hope that she'll improve? zgirnius: I guess that's our difference. I don't see her 'getting scary', in the sense of changing substantially for the worse. She certainly has more scope for action, so her mistakes can have bigger consequences, but I don't think she has gotten 'worse'. > Betsy Hp: > So she's not a make or > break part of the story like say, Sirius or Lupin are. zgirnius: Lupin was a make or break part of PoA. I would not say he is the same to the story as a whole. I don't see that he has had more emotional impact on Harry than McG. Both are excellent teachers whom Harry respects and who provide Harry with some guidance and encouragement at various points. All the DADA teachers have been, in their respective books, and yes, we have only had one female in the bunch. However, I really didn't find the gender of most of the teachers that important. Lupin had to be a guy as he's James' old friend, Barty Jr. had to be because of the father/son thing with Crouch Sr., but Quirrell and Lockhart, as far as I can see, could have served their functions equally well had they been female. I don't think making them so would have been seen as a feminist statement, though . (Snape's a whole 'nother kettle of fish, he definitely has a major, series-wide presence aside from his centrality to the plot of HBP, and is another character that needs to be male, probably because of Lily, and certainly as he was a school rival of James and Co.). > Betsy Hp: > I will admit that I'm always shocked when people say Molly is > strong. She can't even keep her own child from being thrown out of > her home. What's strong about that? zgirnius: Percy was not thrown out, he left, upon attaining his majority, obtaining a good job, and getting into a huge fight with his father. Trouble had been brewing there for quite some time, but I'm not sure what Molly could have done to improve matters. Of course, for me the nails on the chalkboard characters par excellence are the Twins, so naturally I blame them. I would also bet real money that in this regard, my aesthetic sensibilities and Rowling's do not mesh. > BestyHP: > [Frankly, IMO, Molly is the perfect example of the worst sort of > female weakness: everything for a man who's no longer all that > interested; sublimating all of her rage and choked ambition into > cruel and meaningless mind games with the weakest of her offspring as > a stand in for the man she's losing. That most of it is subconscious > makes her even more pathetic, IMO. But that's just me, and I fully > realize that I'm pretty much alone on this. ] zgirnius: Percy being the weakest of her offspring? Or do you mean Ron? I'm honestly not sure what you mean here. However, I don't see Molly as doing everything for her man. She's at least as focused on her kids. And even though she is not the breadwinner, I think she had at least 50% of the influence in decision making. How to spend the winnings in PoA, shopping for the kids' stuff all the time, and whether to join the Order (DD asks HER, not Arthur). Percy was not a joint decision - she can hardly keep two adult family members from getting into a huge fight. I agree she is ambitious for Arthur and the kids, but I'm not sure this is because her own ambitions have been thwarted. I mean, I want my husband to do well in his career - we will make more money that way and he will, presumably, be happier. I want my kids, eventually, to achieve things (they are 2 and 4, it is a trifle early to start worrying about school et. al.). This is despite having a reasonably successful career of my own. I don't know if Rowling has any plans to go there - but Molly has a very long life expectancy, assuming she is not killed in DH. If she really wants a career, it would seem to be a better option for WW witches than RL women - she has far more time remaining to her after inny finishes school (presuming she wants to wait for that). > Betsy Hp: > But Arthur is one of the few characters who treats Harry as a > thinking person in his own right (against Molly's wishes and behind > her back, of course). And he has some strong principles (not shared > by Molly) that I think the WW need to consider. zgirnius: Yes, he is a fine person. Still boring though. I think Molly does share some of his principles (not the Muggle-related ones, though, I will give you that). I also think their relationship is better than you give it credit for. > Betsy Hp: > You could well be right. Though given how JKR has already handled > Ginny, especially if we're supposed to take Ginny as done, zgirnius: I would bet we will see a good deal more of Miss Weasley in Book 7. Whether you will consider this a good thing or not, I could not say. I don't care for her either, but I don't have to. I'm not in love with her, Harry is, and I find this credible. BetsyHP: > And what I also wonder about is that Lily may be something that makes > *Snape* more clear to both the readers and Harry. So rather than > revealing motherhood, we've again learned something about fatherhood. zgirnius: Yes, our possible 'Lily representative' is male. I think even if in learning more about her, we learn about Snape, we will still be learning more about her. Though, we do have one Lily representative that I forgot...Petunia Dursley, Harry's de facto mom. Not a very good one, poor boy. I don't really see how we could learn more about motherhood from Lily (any more than we can learn about fatherhood from James, as opposed to Sirius) since they have been absent from Harry's life owing to their deaths. But Lily could be an example of a strong, and strongly influential, female character. From caspenzoe at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 06:29:08 2007 From: caspenzoe at yahoo.com (caspenzoe) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 06:29:08 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164717 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Caspen: > > > > I'm just curious whether it bothers Alla at all that, although JKR > > doesn't "owe" us "a strong female [adult] character," she has in > fact, > > claimed to have provided one, and gone on to promise to develop > Lilly > > and Petunia further on several occasions, and even, implicitly, > > Minerva, and yet, she has not done so. Nor, given the amount of > > territory she seems to have left to cover, does it seem at all > likely > > that she ever will, if as she also says, her HP books will be > limited > > to seven. In short, she seems to have lied, something she claims > she > > doesn't do. > > Alla: > > That depends on what exactly you are asking bothers me. If you mean > that she did not provide strong female character, then no it does > not bother me, because I believe that Hermione counts as one and > Ginny has a potential to be. > > But as I said, if I would have enjoyed the story, I would not > necessarily bothered if no strong female characters were were at > all, it is just I disagree with basic premises, I think we have at > least one. > > If you mean that whether the absense of well developed female > characters from adults generation bothers me, well again, no it does > not. One because I think Molly is complex enough and second because > I do not see that the story is suffering from it. > > Does it bother me that Petunia and Lily and Minerva are not well > developed despite her promise? Well, there is one more book left, so > I will wait, but even if they would not be and I can still enjoy the > story, it would not bother me. > > BUT does it bother me that she felt a need to say that? Yes, > **that** absolutely does bother me, IF she did not intend to do that > in book 7. > > I believe that for example her adding up the portraits of > Headmistresses to be in the same area as DD speech in OOP. I believe > that she wanted to defend herself, etc. I wish she would not. I do > not see WW as modern society at all. I think that if she wanted to > write about patriarchal society, because it suits her story better, > she should have been strong enough to stick to it. > > And it would have been credible to me that some changes will be > starting at the end with Hermione doing it ( improving women's > situation, etc) > > But again, that is all assuming that no developments for adults > female characters will follow in book 7. Maybe it will be. Snip > I am just thinking that her work would have to include too many > things, had she followed all of our wishes, if it was not necessary > for the story. > > So, I think you may still get your wish for well developed adult > female in book 7 or not. Personally I would not mind to see Lily > better developed at all, but my wish for that is primarily because I > am incredibly annoyed with her implying that James sacrifice was > somehow less significant. > > JMO, > > Alla Caspen: Thanks for the response. You make good points, especially about it being impossible for JKR to fulfill everyone's wishes. And I'm sure Book VII will be enjoyable too, even if I don't get the character development for some of the adult females I think I should, and that I think JKR has promised (very vaguely, I'll admit). I still think it would be really stunning (even if I can't have a lot more character development) to throw an ESE McGonagall twist into VII, on some days. But, since I do like Minerva, I'm a bit ambivalent about that as well. I've made some peace with it over the last couple days as I've perused the additional responses to this thread. I still don't think Minerva is getting fair treatment re: her age, supposed excessive emotionality and softness, etc. I just don't see that she has any real disadvantages in terms of trustworthiness on these issues compared to any of the main adult male characters. Certainly not based upon canon anyway, but I'll be paying close attention in my upcomming rereading. In any case, it's hard to say whom, if anyone is really being sexist (i.e.: us or Jo) so I've decided to stop with the judgements for the time being. I'm not ancient, btw - just 45 - and I certainly don't mind saying so. Caspen From caspenzoe at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 09:01:48 2007 From: caspenzoe at yahoo.com (caspenzoe) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 09:01:48 -0000 Subject: Sexist JKR? Was Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164718 > Carol responds: > Yes, evidently, that's the problem. You're "exercised" by what you > consider to be an important issue, athe supposed sexism of the books, > and I'm completely indifferent to charges of sexism, ageism, racism > (as if Harry and Aunt Petunia were members of different races!), > speciesism or any other kind of -ism. Snip > Carol, who has nothing more to say on this topic but will (silently) > accept your apologies if they're offered Caspen: Of course my apologies are offered! They were in advance last time. I've tried to develop something of a habit of offering advance apologies as I have been known to suffer from bouts of nearly terminal tactlessness and feistiness. I further assure you that my gloves are snuggly fitted onto my fingers, and I intend to keep them there for the remainder of this post. I have even resolved, in another post above, to keep my hands in my pockets for a while in order to keep my little gloved fingers from pointing at others. All that said, I do want to thank you for your response, which did include a wealth of the canonical evidence I asked for. As I mentioned I'm going to begin re-reading the series again, and, I want to note the instances you've pointed out - not - you'll be relieved - to continue this particular disagreement - but because I am genuinely interested in (and not just exercised about) this subject. I appreciate your more textual approach and, appearances to the contrary, do not make a habit of judging all books by their politics. I usually make a point of trying to read them on their own terms, and I've even been known to enjoy them. However, I feel compelled to make an exception with regard to JKR's work for several reasons, all of which are probably grossly unfair to her. First, her work is so unusually (especially for a work of modern children's fiction) and so well-grounded in English literary tradition. As a lover of the tradition, and also, to be honest, as an incurable subversive (which is probably what drew me into the whole ESE McG thread to begin with), I'd really like to see this grand tradition, as I would all good traditions, added to and not just followed. Second, her series is incredibly popular fiction that a generation of children have actually grown up with. My niece, for example, read the first book in her early years of grade school, and will read the last this summer as she is preparing for her final year of high school. Because of this generational popularity, the books' influence on her future values and those of the English-reading world bound to be large. Third, the series' probable influence can't be confined to the English reading world, becuase, Harry's really become a global cultural phenomenon as well. Therefore, I think the books' particular politics are globally important, any and all literary considerations aside. Fourth and finally, although I'm well-aware that JKR would be loathe to agree with me on this one, Harry's story is our first clear case of a truly globally and truly "interactive" (in several senses) cultural phenomenon. thus, I don't think I can possibly overstate (though I'm sure I'll continue to try) the importance of the series' politcs and paradigms to our cultural and political future on our ever-shrinking planet. JMO. I suppose I could be exaggerating just a bit here. Again, as a die-hard subversive, I really do like to take the most extreme view whenever possible. Sincerely Carol, I am very sorry to have offended you, so I hope I can, indeed, consider my apology accepted. Ciao, Caspen From Schlobin at aol.com Wed Feb 7 10:10:08 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 10:10:08 -0000 Subject: Unconscious Sexism (Was: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0702051730w1b671033m46cb63640dd2b5b4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164719 Sorry, but I cannot keep up with who said what on these threads. I agree that there's unconscious sexism about JKR's female characters. Whoever said that we "fill in" information about McGonagall because she's typecast was absolutely correct. Also sterotypically, the most interesting female characters may be the evil ones -- Delores Umbridge, Bellatrix Lestrange (although I hate the fact that the movie casters have played into ANOTHER female stereotype by making Bellatrix young, evil and sexy because it flies in the face of canon...!). Susan From Schlobin at aol.com Wed Feb 7 10:12:22 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (Schlobin at aol.com) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 05:12:22 EST Subject: Snape again...legilimens Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164720 Okay, was Snape SO good at closing his mind that he was able to fool BOTH Voldemort and Albus Dumbledore? I don't think so.... SO.....who is the more accomplished mind reader? Voldemort or Dumbledore? Snape was able to close his mind to Dumbledore's ALL THOSE YEARS? Susan Want to join a low volume listserve for fanatics over 40? Email me at _SusanGSMcGee at aol.com_ (mailto:SusanGSMcGee at aol.com) . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From s_ings at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 13:49:42 2007 From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 13:49:42 -0000 Subject: The Latest From the Prophecy 2007 News Desk! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164721 325 Million Copies Sold, Innumerable Memories Made Harry Potter fans to gather after Deathly Hallows release Though many people see July 21, 2007 ? the just-announced release date for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows ? as the end of an era, true Potterphiles know that it is really just a new beginning. While the seventh and final book will finally reveal the fate of the world's favorite boy wizard, the end of his fans' enthusiasm is nowhere in sight. Our enduring interest in the hows and whys behind Harry's mesmerizing story will bring us to Toronto this summer to attend Prophecy 2007: From Hero to Legend. The organizers of Prophecy are delighted to be hosting the first such event to take place after the release of Deathly Hallows and have already scheduled plenty of special programming, from casual roundtable discussions to scholarly panels, focused on the completed series. "It's the world's first opportunity to discuss Harry's story from beginning to end," says Vishaya Naidoo, the executive chair of the conference. "We can't wait to be part of such an historic moment." Prophecy 2007, which takes place August 2-5, will feature two days of formal academic programming focusing on the development of the series and its fandom. But plenty of light-hearted social activities are also on the weekend's agenda, including a concert featuring three pioneers of Wizard Rock ? Harry and the Potters, Draco and the Malfoys, and The Remus Lupins. Conference attendees can also try their skills at Quidditch or dance the night away at a fancy dress ball. Another Prophecy highlight will be the Hall of Reflection, where fans will be able to share the many ways in which Harry's journey has touched their lives over the past ten years. If you have not already registered for Prophecy, don't miss your chance to share your first thoughts on Deathly Hallows with hundreds of your fellow fans! We're looking forward to celebrating ten years' worth of laughter, tears, and most of all, magic among friends - come and help us to make Prophecy 2007 unique and exciting! Register today ! Also, it's not too late to send in your idea for a presentation, poster session, round table, workshop, or panel to be presented at Prophecy 2007! In case the announcement of the release date for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows has inspired new ideas, we have extended the deadline for submission of your abstract to the Call to Proposals until February 15, 2007. If you've got the beginnings of a brilliant topic that you'd like to expand upon, our Programming Prompts might help you to develop your idea, and you can find fellow presenters in the Programming Collaboration thread on the Prophecy forum . Proposals can be submitted by using the Submissions page. If you have any questions, contact us at formalprogramming at prophecy2007.org. More details about Prophecy 2007 are available at http://hp2007.org . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 14:13:26 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:13:26 -0000 Subject: J.K. Rowling Comments on Completing the Series In-Reply-To: <01af01c74a4e$6e1b5ce0$c0affea9@MOBILE> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164722 Shelley wrote: > That, and a new rumour. (which, btw, doesn't refute the 7's theory, because she talks about the 7/7 date and the 7/21 date) To even think she considered giving in to fans with the 7/7/07 is something I find facinating. I love this woman! Carol responds: As a copyeditor with some knowledge of book production, I can tell you that an author doesn't decide when her own books will come out. Most authors (JKR may be an exception) have a deadline for submitting their completed manuscript, and the publication of the book comes about six months after that. JKR may have been asked if she could meet a January 7 deadline, which would fit with a July 7 publication date, and asked for two more weeks to "edit" (revise) the book, but the manuscript still needs to be typecoded and copyedited (the book design is probably already complete), Mary Grandpre still needs to do the illustrations for the American version, the copyedited manuscript has to be typeset and proofread, JKR has to approve both the edits and the proofs and make a few new corrections, and once all the corrections are in place, the book has to be printed, bound, and distributed--all of this on a tight schedule. No excuse short of an attack by giants on the typesetter's computer will be accepted by the general public for a missed deadline. So JKR is aware of the people who wanted the book to come out on 07/07/07 (which, BTW, would work in both the American and British dating systems), but it was never fully in her control. All she does is plan, write, and revise the manuscript--rather like giving birth to a baby since without the manuscript, there's no book. But there's a lot more to book publishing than the author's contribution. (I've never seen JKR's manuscripts except the snippets on her website, but some books would never be read if they were typeset as the author wrote them!) There's no question, of course, that the number seven is thematically important (seven Weasley children, seven Horcruxes because seven is "a powerfully magical number") and no accident that she always planned seven books. But a publication date of 07/07/07 would have been a gimmick by the publishers (with Scholastic and Bloomsbury cooperating with one another), not a gift from JKR to her reading public. What I found interesting was her comment that we would still have plenty to speculate and argue about, which means that she's *not* going to answer all our questions. Either that, or the scenes and characters will still be open to interpretation. That last part I can live with, as long as I know Snape's motives and backstory. Carol, who sneaked as much canon into this post as possible and hopes that the List Elves will let it stay here rather than moving it to OT Chatter From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 14:55:59 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:55:59 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character:/Good writing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164723 > Caspen: > > Thanks for the response. You make good points, especially about it > being impossible for JKR to fulfill everyone's wishes. And I'm sure > Book VII will be enjoyable too, even if I don't get the character > development for some of the adult females I think I should, and that > I think JKR has promised (very vaguely, I'll admit). > > I still think it would be really stunning (even if I can't have a lot > more character development) to throw an ESE McGonagall twist into > VII, on some days. But, since I do like Minerva, I'm a bit ambivalent > about that as well. > > I've made some peace with it over the last couple days as I've > perused the additional responses to this thread. I still don't think > Minerva is getting fair treatment re: her age, supposed excessive > emotionality and softness, etc. I just don't see that she has any > real disadvantages in terms of trustworthiness on these issues > compared to any of the main adult male characters. Certainly not > based upon canon anyway, but I'll be paying close attention in my > upcomming rereading. In any case, it's hard to say whom, if anyone > is really being sexist (i.e.: us or Jo) so I've decided to stop with > the judgements for the time being. > > I'm not ancient, btw - just 45 - and I certainly don't mind saying > so. > Alla: Do not get me wrong. I think it is perfectly fine for the reader to wish for the certain things to happen in the story. Half of the items I brought up upthread are **my** wishes, which I want to come true really badly. It is just if they do not come true, I will be dissapointed for sure, but I would not necessarily call JKR a bad writer, that would depend on how it would be written, hehe. Let's put it this way, off the top of my head I cannot remember **anything** I agree on with Carol, but my criteria of what constitutes good writing is actually quite close to hers. Not exact, but close enough. Now I do think that the emotional satisfaction of the reader plays very important part in how I evaluate the work of art, but I think that this is a subjective element, which while should be taken into consideration, should not be the only one. IMO there are if not objective, then at least widely accepted criteria of good writing and whether the plot would be resolved the way you or me wish is not one of them. Again totally in my opinion. For example right now I have no idea how I will be able to swallow DD! M Snape if this is who Snape is. BUT incredible as it is I will not put it past JKR if she would be able to **sell** DD!M Snape to me and make me happy at the end. Do you know why? Because I already have the example of Dumbledore in front of me. I hated with passion his speech at the end of OOP. Not only I had doubts that I would be able to feel anything when he dies, I was thinking that the faster he dies, the better off Harry would be. But JKR made me care for him again in HBP to the extent that I did cry when he died. ( Still want to slap him often) I consider it is an example of good writing on her behalf. Now, granted I did not hate DD before HBP, so that would make it so much harder for JKR to please me if she goes with DD!M Snape, LOL, but I am just saying that it is *possible** that my emotional dissatisfaction would still translate into being happy with her writing. To go back to McGonagall. If you were to tell me that her development makes no sense to you in terms of story, I would totally agree with you that it does constitute a bad writing, if it makes sense. I just disagree with the argument that she should be developed more simply because she is a woman, again if that makes sense. And actually I completely agree with you - I do not think that she has any disadvantages in terms of why she should not be trusted whatsoever. Nevertheless, it makes perfect sense to me in terms of the story and it has nothing to do with Minerva and everything to do with Dumbledore. His **need to know** basis, him having no confidante, etc. Do I think it is a good character trait in him? Nope, not at all, but I find this to be a very consistent characterisation of Dumbledore. I think JKR wanted to develop him more than Minerva for the story and she serves as supporting player to showcast that character trait. I also agree with kat that Dumbledore dear did not want his decisions challenged and that is another reason why he does not confide in Minerva much, since she was not keeping her mouth shut at Dursleys, etc. JMO, Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 14:57:56 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:57:56 -0000 Subject: Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164724 Betsy Hp: > Hermione is strong. I think she's JKR's one exception. My worry with Hermione goes back to likability. I don't like Hermione (as she is now), don't admire her, etc. So again, aesthetics, as you said. Carol responds: It's impossible to argue likeability, but I think I understand what you're saying here. Hermione is starting to think that, because she's on the good side, she can get away with behavior that isn't entirely admirable (the sneak jinx in OoP, blackmailing Rita Skeeter, attacking Ron with birds, etc.). Like many very young people, she always thinks she's right. Are you concerned that she's going to go too far, to do something that endangers the Trio, in Book 7? I keep hoping that she'll find out that you can't find the answers to all of life's questions in reference books, and that Luna's intuition will prove right and Hermione's practical/rational approach wrong at some point, just to shake her out of I-know-everything mode. (BTW, I think she's *right* to object to Harry's getting credit for someone else's Potions experiments. The HBP worked hard to figure out improvements that Harry gets high marks for. Sure, she's jealous, but that doesn't make what Harry is doing ethical.) It isn't that I don't like her (though I confess I don't like post-GoF Ginny), but I think she needs to grow out of that stage. I think I was twenty-one when I realized that I didn't know everything, so maybe I'm asking a bit much. (As for whether she's "strong" or not, Harry and Ron would have had a hard time surviving that third-floor corridor without her. And that's just the first book.) > BetsyHP: > I will admit that I'm always shocked when people say Molly is > strong. She can't even keep her own child from being thrown out of > her home. What's strong about that? Carol responds: Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Percy walk out of the house on his own after quarrelling with Arthur? He wasn't "thrown" out. And he was nineteen at the time, a "man" by WW standards. He also returned the sweater (the British term slips my mind) she knitted him on his own initiative. I like Percy in those rare moments when he forgets his dignity and openly shows affection for his family, notably wading out to meet Ron after the second task, but returning the sweater was cruel. He walks out on his father, then breaks his mother's heart as if the quarrel were *her* fault? BetsyHP: And, IMO, Arthur, delt the best with the Dursleys and may have been the only one to actually shame them (until the twins of course, Molly's little helpers). Carol: I don't understand what you're getting at here. You approve of Arthur for shaming the Dursleys (for not saying good-bye to Harry, right?) but I thought you *dis*approved of the Twins, who pranked Dudley to punish him for being a bullying git because it's wrong to torture a helpless Muggle. (Here, it sounds as if you approve of them.) But how are the Twins "Molly's little helpers"? Why do you think that Molly would approve of Muggle-baiting (or whatever we call it when the "baited" Muggle is punished for being himself rather than for being a Muggle)? Arthur reproves them but tries to protect them from Molly, who, IIRC, is extremely angry at them for what they've done. She also doesn't approve of their working on Ton-Tongue Toffees for six months rather than studying for their OWLs. It's fine to dislike Molly (even though I like her). We all have our favorite and least favorite (nails across the blackboard) characters and it's all subjective. But can you clarify what you mean here? Is it really fair to call them "Molly's little helpers" when she disapproves of so much that they do? Carol, who doesn't care whether the female characters are "strong" or not but would like to see them analyzed a little more objectively From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 16:35:39 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:35:39 -0000 Subject: Happy endings and locked rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164725 Jen wrote: > The prophecy seems to be saying if one dies the other can actually 'live' for the first time since their two fates joined, and I read 'live' to be both literal and figurative. Unlike Carol mentioned, I'm not convinced one of them must live from the way the prophecy is worded. Carol responds: I wasn't going by "neither can live while the other survives," which I merely interpret as meaning "neither is really living now, nor can he live (as opposed to survive) until the other is dead." But "either must die at the hand of the other" is different. "Either" means "one or the other of two." It does not mean "both." So *one of the two* must die, killed or destroyed by "the other." Since the chances of Voldie being the victor are slim to none (there'd be no Epilogue to write about those who survive VW2 if he won), it seems clear to me that Harry will not only win the battle and destroy Voldie permanently but survive to see the aftermath. In fact, he'll cease to merely *survive* because the survival of "the other" will no longer prevent him from living a full and happy life. Carol, who realizes that the Prophecy is deliberately ambiguous but sees no way to interpret "either" except as "one or the other" From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Wed Feb 7 19:11:21 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 19:11:21 -0000 Subject: Deadly hollows JKR's "FAVORITE BOOK" of the series!. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164726 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > > There is no disputing matters of taste, but I loved HBP. In that > regard I don't think I'm an oddball (in other respects maybe but not > in that one). In the most sincere sort of opinion poll possible, the > sort where you vote with your dollars, a case could made that HBP has > been enjoyed by more people than any book since Gutenberg invented his > press 550 years ago; after all, nobody really enjoys reading the Bible > or The Quotations Of Chairman Mao. > I have no intentions of reading Mao but I do enjoy reading the Bible and I am hardly the only one! I don't think you can judge the popularity of the books in the series by looking at sales for each one. People like myself who came to the series late may well have started by reading borrowed copies of the available books and then, once their appetites were whetted, started buying the subsequent books as they were released. That is exactly what happened to me except that the first four books were given to me as a Christmas gift so I have contributed equally to the sales of each novel. The sales of HBP probably say a lot about how popular the series has become but little about how popular HBP is compared to the others. In my case I find the notion odd even though I understand that rating the installments is something that many like to do. The series is a whole to me, I don't judge individual books and rate them for quality or anything else. DH will be the deciding factor in how I ultimately rate the whole edifice but I doubt that I will ever have a favorite book in the series. In the end it will be either satisfying or unsatisfying and I don't think the author's satisfaction with the final book says anything at all about how I will ultimately view the whole. I can be a harsher critic than she is, I have no doubt of that. I just try to reign myself in when I post here! Ken ;-) From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 19:32:00 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 19:32:00 -0000 Subject: Deadly hollows JKR's "FAVORITE BOOK" of the series!. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164727 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > Or she could say that after finishing book 7 she might > go back to book 1 and rewrite the entire series because she thinks > she's a better writer now than she was a decade ago. zanooda: I'm not sure about rewriting the entire series, but I would like to see a revised edition one day, you know, with all (or at least most) of those inconsistencies and Flints gone. My husband says that it's a wrong attitude, that the revised books wouldn't be the same, and the mistakes give them authenticity and charm. I doubt that I should listen to him though, because he didn't read HP books. Really, it wouldn't be difficult at all, JKR doesn't even need to look for the mistakes herself, they are already found and discussed from every angle by the fans, on this list included. After all, they already corrected some mistakes, like the number of Hermione's OWLS for example. So why not change other things, starting with NHN's date of death, Charlie's years at Hogwarts etc.? I would buy the revised books, no matter what my husband thinks :-)! > Eggplant wrote: > There is no disputing matters of taste, but I loved HBP. In that > regard I don't think I'm an oddball... zanooda: No, you are not an oddball, or, if you are, so am I, because it's my favorite book so far :-). From va32h at comcast.net Wed Feb 7 21:11:46 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 21:11:46 -0000 Subject: Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164728 Carol writes > What I found interesting was her comment that we would still have > plenty to speculate and argue about, which means that she's *not* > going to answer all our questions. Either that, or the scenes and > characters will still be open to interpretation. That last part I can > live with, as long as I know Snape's motives and backstory. va32h here: I think we will get all the major questions answered, all the ones that are important to JKR. But I think her comment about "plenty to speculate and argue about" refers to the enthusiastic members of the fan community who want literally every conceivable question answered. What would be the Boggart and Patronus for (insert every character ever mentioned). What ever happened to (insert every character ever mentioned that isn't dead). What does (every Hogwarts teacher) do over the summer? What is the backstory for (every object, person, or place ever mentioned). And of course - what are the names of those damn "missing Gryffindor Girls". va32h, who honestly wonders why people can't just use their imagination for the mundane issues, when they are perfectly capable of imagining wild theories for the major ones. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 22:00:48 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 22:00:48 -0000 Subject: Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164729 Carol earlier: > > > What I found interesting was her comment that we would still have plenty to speculate and argue about, which means that she's *not* going to answer all our questions. Either that, or the scenes and characters will still be open to interpretation. That last part I can live with, as long as I know Snape's motives and backstory. > > > va32h here: > > I think we will get all the major questions answered, all the ones that are important to JKR. But I think her comment about "plenty to speculate and argue about" refers to the enthusiastic members of the fan community who want literally every conceivable question answered. > > What would be the Boggart and Patronus for (insert every character > ever mentioned). > > > What is the backstory for (every object, person, or place ever > mentioned). > > va32h, who honestly wonders why people can't just use their > imagination for the mundane issues, when they are perfectly capable > of imagining wild theories for the major ones. > Carol responds: Or what was Snape's relationship with the other Slytherins at Hogwarts? ;-) Now, granted, I'd like to know Snape's Boggart and Patronus simply because JKR has said they'd reveal too much about him for her to answer that question, but I was thinking more of unanswered questions that would lead to discussions, for example, what's going on between Snape and Lupin in the scene where Snape summons Lupin to his office to talk about the piece of parchment he confiscated from Harry? Clearly, they both know something they're concealing from Harry, including who the "manufacturers" of the map were, but it isn't clear whether snape recognizes the names or only suspects that Lupin was one of them based on the insults (four people who clearly know who Snape is insulting him, and one of them suspiciously named Moony?) I don't think she'll answer a question like that in DH (though she might answer it on her website some day), but until and unless she does, it's open to argument and speculation. I still think that different posters will interpret the characters' motives and personalities in different ways even after we know more about them. Sure, we'll find out whether Snape was loyal to Dumbledore or not, but will we ever agree on who and what he is? As for backstory, I'd love to have her publish the complete backstory on MWPP and Teen!Severus since I think she knows more about it than she can possibly include in the book, and I'd also love to read that cut scene between Draco Malfoy and Theo Nott, which will probably never make it into the books. (Here's this intriguing alternate Slytherin, and she's barely even used him in the books so far. And yet I'm betting she knows his whole backstory, too--dead mother, imprisoned DE father. Who was he staying with after his father was arrested when he was only fifteen or just turned sixteen? Is he pro or anti Death Eater after what happened to his dad?) At any rate, some things will be answered in the book, a few little things (like what the teachers do over the summer or how Hagrid "flew" to the Hut on the Rock) can be answered on her website. Stuff like Hermione's life when she's home with her Muggle parents (for increasingly fewer weeks every summer) can be left to fanfic. Anyway, questions that can be answered conciseely and specifically should be answered, especially if they're important to the plor (Godric's Hollow!), but other questions, what's going on beneath the surface in certain scenes, will, I hope, still be subject to interpretation, and we can still have fun with Harry's pov and how the scene looks to him as contrasted with how it looks to us. After all, no two people read "Moby Dick" or "Pride and Prejudice" in exactly the same way. I don't think that's going to happen in the HP books, either. There's too much going on beneath the surface, too much that isn't exactly as it seems even in the earlier books where everything has supposedly already been explained. Carol, who still worries about silly things like how a Dementor can dig a grave From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 7 22:44:01 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 22:44:01 -0000 Subject: Father Figures / Hermione's Path / The Molly Question (long!) (was:Wanted!Comple In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164730 Betsy Hp: I feel like this particular thread is breaking into three different discussion points. So I'm going to seperate them out as I see them (cleverly using only one post to do so ) and see what holds interest. ******* So, first up, Father Figures: > >>Betsy Hp: > > So she's not a make or break part of the story like say, Sirius > > or Lupin are. > >>zgirnius: > Lupin was a make or break part of PoA. I would not say he is the > same to the story as a whole. I don't see that he has had more > emotional impact on Harry than McG. > Betsy Hp: I *strongly* disagree. Fandom has never spent time wondering when McGonagall is going to get off her duff and become a mother-figure for Harry. But between every book since Lupin's introduction there's a large group of readers just sure Lupin is going to have a huge role in the next book as one of Harry's father-figures. I think there's a reason for that. Part of it has to do with the amount of personal time Lupin spent with Harry in PoA. Part of it has to do with the emotional connection Lupin made with Harry: an emotional connection no other adult has ever made. Lupin was able to slow Harry down while Harry was in the middle of "mission mode" and get Harry to think. (Once after sneaking out to Hogsmeade, and more obviously in the Shrieking Shack.) McGonagall has never done the same. She could have, I think, had JKR chosen to go that route. As Harry's head of house, McGonagall could well have taken time to get to know Harry personally and given Harry a chance to get to know her. But JKR puts Lupin in that role. So when Harry starts teaching himself in OotP, it's Lupin who buys him some helpful books. And it's Lupin that we the readers get some background on, and it's Lupin that we spend time talking about. > >>zgirnius: > However, I really didn't find the gender of most of the teachers > that important. Lupin had to be a guy as he's James' old friend, > Barty Jr. had to be because of the father/son thing with Crouch > Sr., but Quirrell and Lockhart, as far as I can see, could have > served their functions equally well had they been female. I don't > think making them so would have been seen as a feminist statement, > though . Betsy Hp: Actually, I think it was important that Lockhart was male. Drives even more home to Harry how *not* to be. A female Lockhart would have been written off more, I think. And again, the teacher of the year with the biggest impact to Harry and the story tends to be a guy. And never is that teacher, McGonagall. At this point I'm not even sure there *should* be a strong female influence in the story. Harry is a boy trying to become a man and there are several father figures helping him along the way, for good or for ill. (Generally, I think, for ill. Even the good ones are flawed in some way. Which makes for a better story, IMO, because it forces Harry to figure out his own way by figuring out just what advice or example he should follow.) > >>zgirnius: > (Snape's a whole 'nother kettle of fish, he definitely has a major, > series-wide presence aside from his centrality to the plot of HBP, > and is another character that needs to be male, probably because of > Lily, and certainly as he was a school rival of James and Co.). Betsy Hp: Snape is a *major* player in Harry's father-figure olympics. I'd say Snape is one part of a triumvirate of the big father figures (the other two being Voldemort and James). Or possibly the opposite of James just as Voldemort is the opposite of Dumbledore. (Though for some reason that I'm not quite sure of honestly, I'm resistant to the idea of Dumbledore as father-figure. Too detached, maybe?) And so Snape *must* be male because Harry is male. Maybe if the series were more romance oriented, with the healing of the WW rift symbolized by a marriage at the end, maybe then we could have a female Snape. But then of course Draco would be female (all of Slytherin would need to be girls, I think) and the story would be very different indeed. ******* Moving right along, Hermione's Path: > >>Betsy Hp: > > But are we (the readers) supposed to notice Hermione heading down > > a bad path? Or does JKR think Hermione is doing great and > > nothing will change? I don't know! And it frustrates the heck > > out of me. > >>zgirnius: > I guess to me it does not matter. Hermione has a self-righteous > streak which makes her sometimes ineffective (SPEW) and sometimes > cruel (Marietta), but it is not something I would call a fatal > flaw. It doesn't make her evil, in my opinion anyway. I will be > equally happy if she somehow comes to see the problem, or if she > continues this way. Betsy Hp: For me it *is* a fatal flaw and something that could lead Hermione to becoming evil, as evil as Umbridge is anyway. So if this is how Hermione is supposed to be, I'll not be able to revisit the earlier books without seeing some ugly taint in all of Hermione's actions. And both Harry and Ron (gosh, especially if Ron *marries* such a creature!) will seem that much weaker for not recognizing the problem. > >>Carol: > > Like many very young people, she always thinks she's right. Are you > concerned that she's going to go too far, to do something that > endangers the Trio, in Book 7? Betsy Hp: And Hermione physically hurts people without blinking because she's so sure of her rightness (something most very young people are kept from doing by responsible adults). I'm actually *hopeful* that Hermione will do something to endanger the Trio in DH. That way the elephant in the room will finally be exposed and delt with, and Hermione will be allowed to choose a different path. I do think Hermione is the Trio's weakest link because of her unchallenged flaw, so if a Trio issue is going to occur, I think it'll be because of Hermione. But I'm just not sure such a problem will arise, or that JKR even sees Hermione as needing to change. ******* And finally, the big bad, The Molly Question (long!): > >>Betsy Hp: > > I will admit that I'm always shocked when people say Molly is > > strong. She can't even keep her own child from being thrown out > > of her home. What's strong about that? > >>zgirnius: > Percy was not thrown out, he left, upon attaining his majority, > obtaining a good job, and getting into a huge fight with his > father. Trouble had been brewing there for quite some time, but I'm > not sure what Molly could have done to improve matters. Betsy Hp: Been a good Mom? Delt with the problem as and when it came up? Stopped encouraging her children to look at their father's job (and therefore their father) as a massive joke? Talked with Arthur about his new principles and either come to grips with them or come to some sort of compromise that the two of them could present to their children together instead of deriding and undermining everything Arthur held dear? Not raised her children to believe popularity and money are the two marks of success? Percy is (hopefully was) Molly's perfect child. He became (or tried to become) the sort of person Molly held up as her ideal. That that type of person would clash with Arthur was a given, as Molly and Arthur have two very different views on what is important in life. Percy's fight with Arthur was Molly's fight with Arthur. The fight neither Arthur or Molly were willing to have (and shame on them, IMO). > >>zgirnius: > Of course, for me the nails on the chalkboard characters par > excellence are the Twins, so naturally I blame them. I would > also bet real money that in this regard, my aesthetic sensibilities > and Rowling's do not mesh. Betsy Hp: Hee! On this we are in complete agreement. I'm not a twin fan myself, and I also wonder at JKR's true feelings on them. However, I don't let Molly (or Arthur for that matter) off the hook with them. Molly's relationship with the twins is interesting. It's completely antagonistic, but there's something deeper there. I think the twins and Molly relate to each other in a way none of her other sons do. I think the twins are able to go beyond what Molly *says* she wants and see what really makes her heart beat with motherly pride. (I often wonder if the twins are a lot like Molly's dead brothers.) So they're scrappers, totally willing to use superior force to get their way. They look down at women as silly fluffy thinkers totally ruled by hormones because that's how Molly sees women. And they'll break whatever rules they have to (moral as well as actual) to earn money. Because in the end, money and money's trappings is what it's all about. In thanks they will of course spend some of their riches on their mother, because they do love her. > >>Betsy Hp: > > [Frankly, IMO, Molly is the perfect example of the worst sort of > > female weakness: everything for a man who's no longer all that > > interested; sublimating all of her rage and choked ambition into > > cruel and meaningless mind games with the weakest of her > > offspring as a stand in for the man she's losing. That most of > > it is subconscious makes her even more pathetic, IMO. But that's > > just me, and I fully realize that I'm pretty much alone on this. > > ] > >>zgirnius: > Percy being the weakest of her offspring? Or do you mean Ron? I'm > honestly not sure what you mean here. Betsy Hp: Oh, Ron, definitely. Unlike Percy, Ron fights her. But since he doesn't have the insight (or the makeup) of the twins, he doesn't fight her correctly, in a way she respects. So Molly punishes Ron by either passively ignoring him or actively setting him up as a fool. The robe incident in GoF is a prime example, I think. Ron gets hideous robes and homemaker Molly can't even be bothered to remove the copious amounts of lace? That she was so late in getting them is a bit strange too. Molly had a heads up about the ball, but she did nothing with that information. And then of course she mocks Ron's body (when he's already expressed a poor sense of body-image by worrying about his appearance) by stating a naked Ron is something to point and laugh at. (Ginny picks up this thread when she does her "virgin loser" rant against Ron in HBP.) > >>zgirnius: > However, I don't see Molly as doing everything for her man. She's > at least as focused on her kids. Betsy Hp: Hmm, but a lot of that is trying to make them worthy of their father. The Howler to Ron goes on about Ron shaming Arthur at the Ministry. But it's complicated by Molly's rage at Arthur sidelining what I presume was a sucessful career to go into his Muggle thing. So at the same time Molly is pushing her sons to become men like their father, she encourages them to see Arthur as an idiot. So I guess it's more, "Become the kind of man your father *should* have been if he hadn't been so foolish." But it's still all about Arthur, not who her children actually are. > >>zgirnius: > And even though she is not the breadwinner, I think she had at > least 50% of the influence in decision making. > Betsy Hp: Arthur has definitely handed the household over to Molly. He (unfortunately) doesn't seem all that concerened or interested in what's going on in the house and would rather be tinkering with his own stuff in the shed. (Something none of his children take part in, which is odd too, I think, and another sign that there's a rift in the Weasley household.) But Molly has no say in Arthur's career decisions. Her strong dislike of his current position contrasts strongly with Arthur's love for it. If it was ever discussed nothing was resolved, IMO. > >>BetsyHP: > And, IMO, Arthur, delt the best with the Dursleys and may > have been the only one to actually shame them (until the twins of > course, Molly's little helpers). > >>Carol: > I don't understand what you're getting at here. You approve of > Arthur for shaming the Dursleys (for not saying good-bye to Harry, > right?)... Betsy Hp: Yes. Especially as Arthur does it so organically without rage or pre- judgment. His own politeness coupled with his very real bewilderment at their rudeness does more to draw attention to the Dursley's bad behavior, IMO, than all the magical threatening and screaming in the world could have done. > >>Carol: > ...but I thought you *dis*approved of the Twins, who pranked Dudley > to punish him for being a bullying git because it's wrong to > torture a helpless Muggle. Betsy Hp: I do. By pranking Dudley the twins undo everything Arthur has done, push him off the moral high ground, and leave the Durleys comfortably safe in their assumption that all wizards are cruel, dangerous, *odd* creatures that need to be forcibly rejected from their lives. Even if one of those wizards is family. IOWs, Arthur was making a really good point and the twins shut him down. Kind of like Molly does (or tries to do, anyway). > >>Carol: > (Here, it sounds as if you approve of them.) Betsy Hp: Sorry, I thought associating them with Molly would be enough. (Plus they were in the paranthasis of negativity that I had going in that particular paragraph.) But yeah, now I can see how it reads awkwardly. (Why didn't I spot that *yesterday*? ) > >>Carol: > But how are the Twins "Molly's little helpers"? Betsy Hp: By shutting Arthur down, the twins assist their mother (unconsciously of course). I think the twins also help out their mom by beating down the sons that are most linked to Arthur (Percy and Ron) and I think this goes back to the twins and Molly having an oddly symbiotic relationship. > >>Carol: > Why do you think that Molly would approve of Muggle-baiting (or > whatever we call it when the "baited" Muggle is punished for being > himself rather than for being a Muggle)? Arthur reproves them but > tries to protect them from Molly, who, IIRC, is extremely angry at > them for what they've done. She also doesn't approve of their > working on Ton-Tongue Toffees for six months rather than studying > for their OWLs. Betsy Hp: Molly is not upset about the muggle-baiting, she's upset about the Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes. So the twins (and the trio) merrily move along thinking it's perfectly okay to attack those weaker than you because Arthur forfeits the field to Molly's rather silly point. Arthur is weak and Molly is stupid. Neither are very good parents because of that. > >>Carol, who doesn't care whether the female characters > are "strong" or not but would like to see them analyzed a little > more objectively Betsy Hp: It's near impossible for me to analize Molly objectively. So I just try and make sure everyone knows I'm not all that objective. I *do* think Molly is supposed to come more from the Mrs. Bennet (of Pride and Prejudice) side of homemaking than the Susan Sowerby (of The Secret Garden) side. Objectively, anyway. Betsy Hp From va32h at comcast.net Wed Feb 7 23:53:53 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 23:53:53 -0000 Subject: Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164731 Carol teases: > > Or what was Snape's relationship with the other Slytherins at > Hogwarts? ;-) va32h sniffs: Yes, but that's *important*. Carol says: > Now, granted, I'd like to know Snape's Boggart and Patronus simply > because JKR has said they'd reveal too much about him for her to > answer that question, va32h: Well those are important too. They will probably be important to our understanding of Snape. (please, please, Jo, do not let them be anything that could be remotely connected to Lily) Carol here: but I was thinking more of unanswered questions > that would lead to discussions, for example, what's going on between > Snape and Lupin in the scene where Snape summons Lupin to his office > to talk about the piece of parchment he confiscated from Harry? > Clearly, they both know something they're concealing from Harry, > including who the "manufacturers" of the map were, but it isn't clear whether snape recognizes the names or only suspects that Lupin was one of them based on the insults (four people who clearly know who Snape is insulting him, and one of them suspiciously named Moony?) I don't think she'll answer a question like that in DH (though she might answer it on her website some day), but until and unless she does,it's open to argument and speculation. va32h wonders: Both of those explanations are fine. Is that such a crucial detail that it is actually worth arguing about? I'm not trying to be sarcastic, really. I've listened to some of Jo's interviews where it really seems that she's surprised at the question, because the thought never occurred to her. I think this would be one of those questions. I really don't think there is anything wrong with wanting to know *more*, I just don't understand why people can't be content to just fill in the blanks for themselves on stuff that is really, ultimately unimportant. Those missing Gryffindor girls - who cares? If they have to have names, call them Ann and Betty and be done with it. Or, just decide that there are only three girls in Harry's year. Those girls are never mentioned, because they don't matter. What is the Fat Lady's backstory? No idea. Maybe it would be fun to invent one - surely just as fun as working out ways that Harry could be an accidental horcrux. va32h, who is too busy trying not to think about how Dementors breed to worry how they dig a grave. From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 7 22:40:43 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 17:40:43 -0500 Subject: Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) References: Message-ID: <002401c74b09$00cea500$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164732 >> From: justcarol67 --Carol snippet-- Or what was Snape's relationship with the other Slytherins at Hogwarts? ;-)<< --Ronin's comments-- I think Snape's relationship with other Slytherins at Hogwarts was almost non-existent. When we see flashes of his past through the pensieve or in occlumencey lessons, he was always alone with nobody but Lily trying to stand up for him. But I assume that at some point, he struck up a "friendship" with Lucious Malfoy. I wonder at his role in the "friendship" though. Was he a friend like Sirius was to James or like Goyle is to Draco? --Carol snippet-- >>what's going on between Snape and Lupin in the scene where Snape summons Lupin to his office to talk about the piece of parchment he confiscated from Harry? Clearly, they both know something they're concealing from Harry, including who the "manufacturers" of the map were, but it isn't clear whether Snape recognizes the names or only suspects that Lupin was one of them based on the insults (four people who clearly know who Snape is insulting him, and one of them suspiciously named Moony?) I don't think she'll answer a question like that in DH (though she might answer it on her website some day), but until and unless she does, it's open to argument and speculation.<< --Ronin's comments-- It seems that she's already alluded to this in the past books. Everyone knows who Wormtail is and Lupin is obvious. In OotP, Harry uses Padfoot as code when telling Snape that Sirius is in trouble and Snape knows what he's talking about. Dumbledore mentions this at the end, when they've returned from the MoM. Having known who created the parchment, I doubt he knew what it was exactly. But like the invisibility cloak, Dumbledore probably wanted Harry to keep it as another useful item of protection. --Carol snippet-- >>I still think that different posters will interpret the characters' motives and personalities in different ways even after we know more about them. Sure, we'll find out whether Snape was loyal to Dumbledore or not, but will we ever agree on who and what he is?<< --Ronin's comments-- I'm sure you are correct. Even some of us who have similar opinions now have slight differences in our theories and interpretations. I'm sure that even the questions that are answered in the book will be argued by some. If Snape, for instance, turns out to be a traitor to Dumbledore, I would probably debate the point with JKR personally. What does she know? lol But we will all have plenty of opinons and theories of what happens in the future of all the remaining characters for a long time to come. I only hope that the main questions are answered with this final book. If it's one of those endings that leaves us hanging and is so open to interpretation that we don't know who's survived, etc. I'm going to need to be admitted to St. Mungo's. Cheers, Ronin From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 01:05:04 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:05:04 -0000 Subject: Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) In-Reply-To: <002401c74b09$00cea500$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164733 Carol: > but it isn't clear whether Snape recognizes the names or only > suspects that Lupin was one of them based on the insults (four > people who clearly know who Snape is insulting him, and one of them > suspiciously named Moony?) Ronin: > It seems that she's already alluded to this in the past books. > Everyone knows who Wormtail is and Lupin is obvious. In OotP, Harry > uses Padfoot as code when telling Snape that Sirius is in trouble > and Snape knows what he's talking about. Dumbledore mentions this > at the end, when they've returned from the MoM. zgirnius: Also in OotP, Sirius addressed James as 'Prongs' in front of Snape and Lily, in the memory Harry sees in Snape's Pensieve. And the Marauders use their nicknames freely leaving the exam. I don't think they were at all a secret and Snape likely knew them all, if not their meanings, other than Lupin's, which he did find out. From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 8 01:43:29 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 20:43:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) References: <002401c74b09$00cea500$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: <001f01c74b22$8ad848f0$0f78400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164734 > --Ronin's comments-- > I think Snape's relationship with other Slytherins at Hogwarts was > almost non-existent. When we see flashes of his past through the > pensieve or in occlumencey lessons, he was always alone with nobody > but Lily trying to stand up for him. But I assume that at some point, > he struck up a "friendship" with Lucious Malfoy. I wonder at his role > in the "friendship" though. Was he a friend like Sirius was to James > or like Goyle is to Draco? Magpie: Interesting that you would say so, because I was just having an intense conversation about just this with someone--I find the Snape/Lucius backstory to be fascinating and wonder if it will be explained in the next book. In PS all we know is that Snape "seems to like" Draco in the first class-though that might not have to do with Lucius. In CoS Draco says he'll put in a good word for Snape with Lucius to be headmaster, which makes Snape smile, and at the time made it seem like Draco might not know they knew each other. I believe it's in GoF that we get our first hint of a connection between the two men, when Snape makes a "sudden movement" at the mention of Lucius being in the graveyard. That's also perhaps the book where Sirius says Snape went around with a "gang" of Slytherins who all became DEs. He doesn't mention Lucius there, but in OotP refers to Snape as Lucius' lapdog. In that book we also learn that Lucius has had good things to say about Snape at the Ministry. Finally, in HBP, Narcissa says he and Snape are old friends. I'd love to find out what their relationship was like after all that! I definitely take Sirius at his word when he says Snape went around with a gang--though of course Sirius isn't objective about Snape and wasn't a close to him so wouldn't necessarily know what kind of a relationship they had. We've barely seen anything of Snape's past so wouldn't know about his friendships necessarily. If there were times where Snape was backed up by his friends they probably wouldn't be his worst memory. In talking about it I realized that I've half-spun a whole situation with Snape and Lucius that relates to how Snape views Draco and what Draco means to him etc. It turns out it was very different from what the other person imagined--and both of us realized we were just speculating madly. We might not ever get details about the two of them, but JKR has built a pretty consistent case for there being something specific there, and so far there's no need for it to be there. I'm hoping we get an interesting dynamic there, since Snape's had a really intense story with the Malfoys with hints that his relationships with the family started with Lucius, yet he's the one we haven't seen him with. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 02:46:47 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 02:46:47 -0000 Subject: Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164735 Carol teased: > > > > Or what was Snape's relationship with the other Slytherins at Hogwarts? ;-) > va32h sniffed: > > Yes, but that's *important*. Carol responds: I know. :-) I was just putting on my Twins hat after giving everybody a good dose of Carol McGonagall. Aside from a Severus/Regulus connection, which I do think is at least possible (as you know, I think young Snape saw Regulus die and that may have helped him turn to DD), I'd really like to know how Severus could have been part of a "gang of Slytherins," most of whom seem to be at least five years older than he was. (I think he was their pet prodigy, hence "Lucius Malfoy's lap dog" in Sirius Black's distorted perspective, but what do I know?) > Carol earlier: > > > Now, granted, I'd like to know Snape's Boggart and Patronus simply because JKR has said they'd reveal too much about him for her to answer that question, > va32h: > > Well those are important too. They will probably be important to our > understanding of Snape. (please, please, Jo, do not let them be > anything that could be remotely connected to Lily) Carol: Are we the only two who feel that way, I wonder? Since we're talking hopes, not reasoned argument, I'll just say that I hope they *weren't* Potions partners. I don't want Lily to have anything to do with the HBP's Potions improvements, which I think are his alone, and if she passed on his spells to James and company (Levicorpus was , after all) she deserves to be hung upside down by her ankles for half an hour (at least). But I don't think she did. Saint Lily won't turn out to be a sneaking traitor who gives her Potions partner's spells to his worst enemy. Nope. I don't think there's a Lily/Snape connection other than his not wanting an innocent woman to die because of his information to Voldie. Anyway, I'm getting OT here. I'm sure she'll tell us what made Snape join the DEs in the first place and what made him turn to DD. If she doesn't, she'll have a horde of disappointed fans to deal with! > Carol earlier: > but I was thinking more of unanswered questions that would lead to discussions, for example, what's going on between Snape and Lupin in the scene where Snape summons Lupin to his office to talk about the piece of parchment he confiscated from Harry? Clearly, they both know something they're concealing from Harry, including who the "manufacturers" of the map were, but it isn't clear whether Snape recognizes the names or only suspects that Lupin was one of them based on the insults (four people who clearly know who Snape is insulting him, and one of them suspiciously named Moony?) I don't think she'll answer a question like that in DH (though she might answer it on her website some day), but until and unless she does,it's open to argument and speculation. > > va32h wonders: > > Both of those explanations are fine. Is that such a crucial detail > that it is actually worth arguing about? I'm not trying to be > sarcastic, really. I've listened to some of Jo's interviews where it > really seems that she's surprised at the question, because the > thought never occurred to her. I think this would be one of those > questions. > Carol again: Oh, no. It's very important from a DDM!Snape perspective. Snape needs to be telling the truth in PoA--that he knew nothing about the SK switch and didn't know that Wormtail was the spy. Either that, or he knew the nicknames but never heard Bellatrix and the other DEs (those closest to LV) discussing Wormtail. We know he didn't know they were Animagi and he couldn't have known that Pettigrew was alive, but DDM!Snape has to have sincerely believed that Sirius Black was the spy/traitor/murderer, that Lupin was his accomplice, and that he was saving HRH's lives. So if he *knew* that the people who were insulting him were James, et al. because he already knew their nicknames (and who was who), it's harder to explain how he would not have known that Wormtail, aka Peter Pettigrew, was the spy. Whereas if he only deduced that James and Co. were the makers of the troublesome parchment that he guessed was something like directions for getting into Hogsmeade from the insults (four people who clearly knew him) and the nickname "Moony," which would logically belong to Lupin, then he's off the hook and there's no reason to doubt his sincerity throughout PoA. His anger would be caused, not by a schoolboy Prank, but by Black's (supposed) betrayal bringing about the murders he was trying to prevent. At any rate, it's subject to both interpretations, and perhaps others I haven't thought of--exactly the sort of argument/speculation thing that JKR said she would keep open. va32h: > I really don't think there is anything wrong with wanting to know *more*, I just don't understand why people can't be content to just fill in the blanks for themselves on stuff that is really, ultimately unimportant. Those missing Gryffindor girls - who cares? If they have to have names, call them Ann and Betty and be done with it. Or, just decide that there are only three girls in Harry's year. Those girls are never mentioned, because they don't matter. Carol: Oh, they have names. JKR made a chart of forty students, five boys and five girls from each House, in Harry's year. She just never got around to putting those two into the story (though I think their Boggarts make a token appearance in PoA). True, it's not important, but it's "factual" information of the sort she can easily provide to make the fans feel that they know "everything" about the WW without in any way influencing her readers' (varied) interpretations of the books. > va32h: > What is the Fat Lady's backstory? No idea. Maybe it would be fun to invent one - surely just as fun as working out ways that Harry could be an accidental horcrux. Carol: Well, yes, and probably at least as important from my non-Horcrux perspective, but Harry's scar and the powers he acquired from Voldemort are crucial to the last book, and Scar!Horcrux is one currently popular explanation. If the Scar!Horcrux is another Mark Evans, no one will talk about it after DH comes out. And even if it turns out to be true, the topic will dwindle in popularity because it won't be a subject for speculation or argument any longer, and it will have its limits as a subject for interpretation as far as I can see. The Fat Lady we can always speculate on, but no one will because she's not important AFAWK and we'll never know the answers. > > > va32h, who is too busy trying not to think about how Dementors breed > to worry how they dig a grave. > Carol, who'd rather *not* think about how dementors breed! From muellem at bc.edu Thu Feb 8 02:59:00 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 02:59:00 -0000 Subject: Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164736 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol teased: > > > > > > Or what was Snape's relationship with the other Slytherins at > Hogwarts? ;-) > > > va32h sniffed: > > > > Yes, but that's *important*. > > Carol responds: > I know. :-) I was just putting on my Twins hat after giving everybody > a good dose of Carol McGonagall. Aside from a Severus/Regulus > connection, which I do think is at least possible (as you know, I > think young Snape saw Regulus die and that may have helped him turn to > DD), I'd really like to know how Severus could have been part of a > "gang of Slytherins," most of whom seem to be at least five years > older than he was. (I think he was their pet prodigy, hence "Lucius > Malfoy's lap dog" in Sirius Black's distorted perspective, but what do > I know?) colebiancardi: I also think that Snape had friends at Hogwarts - perhaps not like James & Sirius were friends, but friends nonetheless. I also think he was close to Regulus as well and that Regulus was one(if not THE) reason why Snape turned. > Carol: > Are we the only two who feel that way, I wonder? colebiancardi: nope, count me in as not wanting Lily to play a part in this either :) That is why I hang my hat on Regulus, not Lily. Afterall, Draco calls Hermione a mudblood as well, they are in the same Potions class, yet they aren't Potions partners(and it seems that Draco holds his own in Potions) and I doubt anyone would think Draco has a "thing" for Hermione. how many days until book 7? LOL. From va32h at comcast.net Thu Feb 8 03:26:30 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 03:26:30 -0000 Subject: Snape's Friends (was Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164737 Carol said: I know. :-) I was just putting on my Twins hat after giving everybody a good dose of Carol McGonagall. Aside from a Severus/Regulus connection, which I do think is at least possible (as you know, I think young Snape saw Regulus die and that may have helped him turn to DD), I'd really like to know how Severus could have been part of a "gang of Slytherins," most of whom seem to be at least five years older than he was. (I think he was their pet prodigy, hence "Lucius Malfoy's lap dog" in Sirius Black's distorted perspective, but what do I know?) va32h thinks out loud: Could Snape have been sort of the Wormtail of his gang? The one they let pal around with him for amusement's sake? Of course, Snape is a much better Wizard than Wormtail, and he doesn't seem so needy now. But as *you* know, I think 11 year old Snape was precocious and eager to show off his tricks and desperately in need of friends. I can see 11 year old Snape being a willing puppy dog. va32h From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Thu Feb 8 02:11:29 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 21:11:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) References: <002401c74b09$00cea500$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> <001f01c74b22$8ad848f0$0f78400c@Spot> Message-ID: <002001c74b26$73066d70$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164738 >> Magpie: I'd love to find out what their relationship was like after all that! I definitely take Sirius at his word when he says Snape went around with a gang--though of course Sirius isn't objective about Snape and wasn't a close to him so wouldn't necessarily know what kind of a relationship they had. We've barely seen anything of Snape's past so wouldn't know about his friendships necessarily. If there were times where Snape was backed up by his friends they probably wouldn't be his worst memory.<< --Ronin's Comments-- It is a very interesting subject and you've made a lot of good points. I had forgotten about Sirius's comment. It puzzled me though, that just after finishing up his OWLs, snape would be alone rather than talking with his friends about the test or just letting off steam after a long couple of weeks testing. Then, the fact that nobody did anything but watch and smirk while he was being humiliated. There were quite a few people present and yet he was the only Slytherin... So, based on that I would guess that he was, as Sirius said, Lucius's lapdog. He would probably bide his time and study and practice rather than drawing attention to himself like Lucius would have done. It may be that he was jealous of Lucius as well, which is what would drive him to study and experiment with magic even harder so that one day he would be superior. Of course, this is just my speculation. My guess about Draco is that after the trials, Lucius and Snape didn't associate as freely or publicly as they had while they were both DEs. So, Draco wasn't aware that Snape and his father were old friends. But Lucius probably mentioned Draco to Snape in a, "Please look after my boy at school", kind of way. This whole subject is very interesting to me. I do hope that we are enlightened a bit on the subject in DH. Honestly, I wouldn't mind a re-telling of the entire story from the Slytherin's point of view. Although this is the last installment of Harry Potter's story, there is so much to the world and characters throughout the story that some sort of spin-off series should be written at some point. At least, I think it would be a shame not to. Cheers, Ronin From va32h at comcast.net Thu Feb 8 04:17:18 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 04:17:18 -0000 Subject: Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) In-Reply-To: <002001c74b26$73066d70$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164739 Ronin writes: It is a very interesting subject and you've made a lot of good points. I had forgotten about Sirius's comment. It puzzled me though, that just after finishing up his OWLs, snape would be alone rather than talking with his friends about the test or just letting off steam after a long couple of weeks testing. Then, the fact that nobody did anything but watch and smirk while he was being humiliated. There were quite a few people present and yet he was the only Slytherin... va32h here: If Snape's friends were younger (Regulus) and older (Lucius and his gang) it would make sense for them not to be around Snape at these times. How much older is Lucius than Snape? For some reason, I thought quite a bit older. But if it's at least three years, Lucius & Co. would have been out of school. va32h From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Feb 8 15:08:54 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:08:54 -0000 Subject: Lily's friends, Harry learning about her (Re: Happy endings and locked rooms) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164740 > Snow: > It would make utter sense that the only persons who could have > worked in the locked room would have been persons who had the same > power that the room holds. I always liked the idea of Neville's > mom having worked alongside of Lily (both being pregnant and due > just a day from each other), Alice does show an extreme love for > Neville even yet, despite her present circumstances. Jen: Yes to the power, the idea is growing on me as the answer for how Harry could unlock the room in DH. Talking about Alice, if she and Neville never have more of a relationship (and it doesn't look promising) that would be a sad part of the series for me. I did expect early on she might recover and be the one to talk to Harry about Lily. Then I wondered if it might be Hestia Jones of the Advance Guard, who sounded youngish and wanted to see Harry since she volunteered. But after HBP, it sounds like Aberforth is the Order member most likely to have a bigger role so it comes down to Lupin as the one who would remember Lily and be able to talk to Harry most intimately about her. I thought it would be interesting for Harry to hear about her from a close female friend and not a friend of her husband's, but perhaps she and Lupin *were* close friends, separate from James. JKR hinted that Lupin thought very highly of her if not outright having a crush on her. ;) Plus that's something else to do with Lupin in DH after his role dwindled in HBP. Jen R. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 15:15:18 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:15:18 -0000 Subject: Snape's Friends (was Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164741 Carol earlier: Aside from a Severus/Regulus connection, which I do think is at least possible (as you know, I think young Snape saw Regulus die and that may have helped him turn to DD), I'd really like to know how Severus could have been part of a "gang of Slytherins," most of whom seem to be at least five years older than he was. (I think he was their pet prodigy, hence "Lucius Malfoy's lap dog" in Sirius Black's distorted perspective, but what do I know?) > va32h thinks out loud: > > Could Snape have been sort of the Wormtail of his gang? The one they let pal around with him for amusement's sake? > > Of course, Snape is a much better Wizard than Wormtail, and he doesn't seem so needy now. But as *you* know, I think 11 year old Snape was precocious and eager to show off his tricks and desperately in need of friends. I can see 11 year old Snape being a willing puppy dog. Carol responds: Well, not exactly the Wormtail since he was so much younger than the others whereas Wormtail was in the same year as the other Marauders. But I think that Lucius, at least, had his eye on the little prodigy (Severus), and not merely as a source of amusement (see below). Being part of a gang of older kids would have provided eleven- and twelve-year-old Severus with a false sense of security, but by about his third year, he would have been pretty much alone, having no equals, probably, in his own year. (Who do we know who might be closer to his age than Lucius? Crabbe? Goyle? Macnair?) With his older friends/protectors gone, Severus might have turned to the younger Regulus as a friend then but relied on himself alone when confronted by MWPP. It seems that he usually "gave as good as he got" and the humiliating "worst memory" is the sole instance in which he was publicly bested--and worse, nearly rescued by a Gryffindor girl! Unless he's not exaggerating about being attacked four on one, which would not be humiliating so much as a source of fierce and lasting resentment. (Please, fellow posters, don't call me sexist for the remark about Lily. I'm trying to think from the perspective of a teenage boy who was, IIRC, upside down at the time.) Anyway, Wormtail is the same age as the other Marauders and is part of their group simply by virtue of sharing a dorm room with them. (Picture Ron and Harry never having become friends with Hermione. They might have been closer to their dorm mates Seamus and Dean, admitting Neville into the group as a kind of tag-along simply because it would be cruel to exclude him.) Once Peter learned to become an Animagus, they needed him to open up the Whomping Willow for them on full-moon nights, and he must have seemed more like one of them--not to mention that he wasn't as talentless as everyone thought since he seems to have contributed to the Marauder's Map. But I get the feeling that James likes him or tolerates him because he enjoys having an adoring fan oohing and ahing over his reflexes whereas Sirius tolerates Wormtail's company only because James does. (And Remus just wants to be liked, so he'll take friendship or companionship where he can find it--the more, the better.) So you have a gang of four with a clear heirarchy: the Quidditch champion/bully as the Alpha male, the equally arrogant handsome pureblood who got sorted into Gryffindor for his reckless courage despite his Dark wizard family history as his best friend and fellow Slytherin hater, the werewolf Prefect who lacks the courage to stand up to his friends (in marked contrast to Neville!), and the supposedly talentless tagalong who cultivates the friendship of those stronger than he is. With Severus, it's not really the same type of relationship--more as if HRH (or MPP minus Wormtail) suddenly discovered that an ickle firstie in their House had enormous talents not only for hexing but inventing spells and improving potions, and they invited the little prodigy into their group, partly for amusement and partly to cultivate his loyalty, to make sure that, when the time came, those talents would be put to use for *their* side. (I think some such relationship at Hogwarts accounts for Snape's continuing concern and affection for the Malfoys despite his loyalty to Dumbledore.) As I said, these are the kinds of things we can speculate or argue about (in the sense of a civil discussion with canon support) now, but it's possible that DH will answer these questions for us. For now, all we have is the Pensieve memory and a few remarks by two less than objective witnesses to the past, Sirius Black and Severus Snape himself, along with whatever crumbs JKR throws to us (the mathematically impossible Black family tree, with its thirteen-year-old fathers, among them). Carol, finding that the more canon we have, the more questions we have, and hoping that DH will resolve the mysteries without imposing a "correct" interpretation of the characters and their internal conflicts on the reader From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Thu Feb 8 14:48:43 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 09:48:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) References: Message-ID: <002901c74b90$3ba48500$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164742 >>>va32h wrote: If Snape's friends were younger (Regulus) and older (Lucius and his gang) it would make sense for them not to be around Snape at these times. How much older is Lucius than Snape? For some reason, I thought quite a bit older. But if it's at least three years, Lucius & Co. would have been out of school. <<< --Ronin's comments-- This is a very valid point. I was going under the assumption that they were about the same age. If Lucious is in fact older, it would make even more sense that Snape's role in the friendship would be more subservient. Also, Lucious being older may have been sitting his NEWTS or already out of school. It still makes me curious though, that no other Slytherins were around Snape during these scenes. Surely, there were other Slytherins in Snapes class. Even if they weren't hanging out together, I would think they would at least acknowledge each other. But Snape walked alone and remained alone at the lake and nobody but Lily even seemed mildly interested that he was being humiliated for no reason other than he exists. Had this been the case with Crabbe or Goyle, Draco would've been with them or at least, their head of house or a teacher would have intervened. (Not to say, I suppose that this couldn't have happened later) Maybe Snapes friends were all meeting with their Slug Club and Snape wasn't seen as important or connected enough to belong. But, I would think that any Slytherin would take offense to any of their house members being harrassed by a Gryffindor. At any rate, you've made a great point and I will try to find evidence of the age differences. Someone had berated me for joking that Snape might one day return as headmaster, because he was a DE and a child abuser. But, Karkarof was also a DE and became head of Durmstrang. He was a known DE, yet Dumbledore even treated him as a gracious guest during the TWT. I would guess that Snape and Karkarof met while in service to the Dark Lord. A fine, outstanding citizen, that Karkarof. It just seems that even among his DE friends, nobody seems to trust or like Snape. Of course, with the exception of the Malfoys. Bellatrix LeStrange certainly didn't trust or like him much. But Narcissa seemed to trust only Snape. I wonder if Narcissa was in Snape's class. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 15:32:47 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:32:47 -0000 Subject: Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164743 va32h here: > > If Snape's friends were younger (Regulus) and older (Lucius and his > gang) it would make sense for them not to be around Snape at these > times. How much older is Lucius than Snape? For some reason, I thought > quite a bit older. But if it's at least three years, Lucius & Co. would have been out of school. Carol responds: Lucius's age is given as 41 at some point in GoF (I can't remember whether it's near the beginning or the end of the school year). JKR gives Snape's age as "35 or 36" in GoF, presumably 35 at the beginning of the school year and 36 after January 9. So Lucius is about five or six years older, depending on when his birthday falls. He could have been anywhere from a fifth year to a seventh year when Sevvie entered Hogwarts, but he's definitely older. The Lexicon gives approximate ages for all the characters, but I don't quite trust it. I think that Snape was born in 1959, making him, like Sirius Black, 22 at the time of Godric's Hollow (and twenty-one years older than Harry). Carol, noting that Bellatrix seems to be even older than Lucius according to the snippet from the Black family tree, so she was probably a seventh-year when Severus entered school From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 15:35:31 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:35:31 -0000 Subject: Karkarof as Headmaster v Snape as Headmaster WAS: Snape&Lucius In-Reply-To: <002901c74b90$3ba48500$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164744 > --Ronin's comments-- > > Someone had berated me for joking that Snape might one day return as headmaster, because he was a DE and a child abuser. But, Karkarof was also a DE and became head of Durmstrang. He was a known DE, yet Dumbledore even treated him as a gracious guest during the TWT. > I would guess that Snape and Karkarof met while in service to the Dark Lord. A fine, outstanding citizen, that Karkarof. Alla: Raises her hand. Since I most definitely shudder in horror for poor children, especially those who may have the misfortune to have parents whose Snape hated at some point at their life, when I imagine Snape as Headmaster, and said so in response to your joking idea, I just wish to say that disagreeing with the idea, hoping that the idea does not come true does not mean berating *you* for it. And why should this necessarily be a joke? If you want Snape to be a Headmaster, it is your right to wish for it it (and several people did in non joking way), just as it is my right to hope that this wil never come true and that Snape will pay for all he did to the characters I like. Karkarof, hmmm. Yes, Dumbledore totally treats him courteously, but despite all the talk about magical cooperation,etc, I did not get an impression that Durmstrang as school is being treated very courteously. IMO of course, but I think Krum is portrayed as exception, nice guy and all that. I can be wrong, but Durmstrang is a school that teaches Dark Arts, the school where Lucius wanted to send his kid, etc. Nope, I think that former DE as Headmaster does not reflect this school in good light. Does not mean that all kids there are bad of course, but again in my opinion. Alla. From cdayr at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 16:06:22 2007 From: cdayr at yahoo.com (cdayr) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 16:06:22 -0000 Subject: Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) In-Reply-To: <002901c74b90$3ba48500$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164745 > --Ronin's comments-- > > This is a very valid point. I was going under the assumption that they were about the same age. If Lucious is in fact older, it would make even more sense that Snape's role in the friendship would be more subservient. Also, Lucious being older may have been sitting his NEWTS or already out of school. > It still makes me curious though, that no other Slytherins were around Snape during these scenes. Surely, there were other Slytherins in Snapes class. Even if they weren't hanging out together, I would think they would at least acknowledge each other. But Snape walked alone and remained alone at the lake and nobody but Lily even seemed mildly interested that he was being humiliated for no reason other than he exists. > > It just seems that even among his DE friends, nobody seems to trust or like Snape. Of course, with the exception of the Malfoys. Bellatrix LeStrange certainly didn't trust or like him much. But Narcissa seemed to trust only Snape. I wonder if Narcissa was in Snape's class. > > Cheers, > Ronin > It seems possible that Narcissa was a friend of Snape's, without the potential romantic overtones that I know many posters think might be there. Certainly all of the friend groups we have in our current student population include important boy/girl friendships- the most prominent being HRH of course, but even Draco and Pansy, although it may be romance as well, certainly seem to be friends. I just think that friendships amongst a group of people who have been selected to be together based on their inherent ambition and cunning will be fundamentally different than friendships between people placed together for their courage or their loyalty or their intelligence. In many ways, the Slytherins are set up in their house to develop very unequal friendships simply because of the fact that they are all (in theory) looking for ways to get ahead of each other. This means that what Severus (or Lucius, or Draco, or any Slytherin) experiences as friendship may look very different that the friendships we see in the other houses. It is, IMO, one of the basic flaws in the house system, that the kids are all placed in a situation where there friends are people very much like them, and their rivals are "different" from them. Very risky, in terms of promoting positive social growth for these kids. My point being, I think it is possible that Narcissa or Lucius or Regulus may have been a "friend" of Severus during school, but that might not mean they would be willing to stick their neck out for him in a situation like the post-OWLS humiliation. And if we know one thing for sure about our dear Severus, it is that he knows how to shut of his emotions from connecting to anyone else and is very protective of himself (occlumency *and* legilimancy, after all), so his version of "friendship" may be very limited. Just thinking out loud, thanks for the very thought-provoking topic, Celia From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Thu Feb 8 16:15:57 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 11:15:57 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) References: Message-ID: <001301c74b9c$6b1443a0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164746 --Carol wrote-- >>>Lucius's age is given as 41 at some point in GoF (I can't remember whether it's near the beginning or the end of the school year). JKR gives Snape's age as "35 or 36" in GoF, presumably 35 at the beginning of the school year and 36 after January 9. So Lucius is about five or six years older, depending on when his birthday falls. He could have been anywhere from a fifth year to a seventh year when Sevvie entered Hogwarts, but he's definitely older.<<< --Ronin's Comments-- This is excellent. I wish I had my copy of GOF here so I could read the exact passages, but I loaned it to a friend who's son took it into the bath and I have yet to replace it. Anyway, this makes a lot of sense. It also makes me wonder if Snape and Wormtail were secretly friendly during their Hogwarts days. It seemed obvious at the time that Wormtail took pleasure from watching James humiliate Snape. This makes me detest Wormtail all the more. Snape seems to openly loathe Wormtail, even in front of other Death Eaters. I had assumed it was because nobody has respect for Wormtail. But Wormtail was a Gryffindor, wasn't he? There must be someone, other than Snape, who were Slytherins in Snape's same year. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 17:22:31 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:22:31 -0000 Subject: Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164749 Alla wrote: > > Karkarof, hmmm. Yes, Dumbledore totally treats him courteously, but despite all the talk about magical cooperation,etc, I did not get an impression that Durmstrang as school is being treated very courteously. IMO of course, but I think Krum is portrayed as exception, nice guy and all that. I can be wrong, but Durmstrang is a school that teaches Dark Arts, the school where Lucius wanted to send his kid, etc. > > Nope, I think that former DE as Headmaster does not reflect this school in good light. Does not mean that all kids there are bad of course, but again in my opinion. Carol responds: We don't really see much of the other Durmstrang students (I only remember Karkaroff rebuking Polyakoff (sp?), who wants some "vine," for dribbling his food down his robes. (Durmstrang's finest, a would-be TWT competitor, with the table manners of a three-year-old? But he seems innocuous enough, otherwise.) The Durmstrang students choose to sit with the Slytherins, probably because that's where they feel most comfortable. (Surely, they've heard of Salazar Slytherin and know his symbol?) Or maybe Karkaroff directs them to that table because he was himself a Sytherin at one time (he's older than Lucius Malfoy, but he knows him, and a Russian-sounding name is no guarantee that he was educated at Durmstrang. The various Lestranges, whose name sounds French, were educated at Hogwarts, the oldest being Tom Riddle's contemporary. Maybe Karkaroff was, too?) Dumbledore, of course, is courteous to Karkaroff because he believes in manners (as we see even on the tower in HBP) and because he believes in second chances, and, of course, the whole point of the TWT is International Magical Cooperation: "The Tri-Wizard Tournament's aim," says DD at the black-draped end-of-the-year banquet, "was to further and promote magical understanding. In the light of what has happened--of Lord Voldemort's return--such ties are more important than ever before" (GoF Am. ed. 723). Dumbledore, IMO, is recruiting future allies, and unifying the three schools, Durmstrang, Beauxbatons, and Hogwarts, is as much a part of his hopes and plans as unifying the four Hogwarts Houses. When he asks them to raise their glasses in tribute to the memory of Cedric Diggory, who exemplified the Hufflepuff traits of friendship, loyalty, hard work, and fair play (721-22), everyone present, Slytherins and Durmstrang students included (the cowardly Karkaroff has already fled) stands in tribute to Voldemort's innocent victim, an admirable person whom everyone, including Viktor Krum, liked: "They did it, all of them; the benches scraped as *everyone in the Hall* stood, and raised their goblets, and echoed in one loud, low, rumbling voice, 'Cedric Diggory'" (721) (Everyone except Draco and a few Slytherin cronies also stands in tribute to Harry.) Poor Viktor Krum, who was Imperioed into Crucioing Cedric, looks uncomfortable as Dumbledore talks about the purpose of the TWT, but Dumbledore is specifically addressing the Durmstrang students (and probably Viktor in particular) when he says, "Every guest in this Hall will be welcomed back here at any time, should they wish to come. I say to you all once again--in the light of Lord voldemort's return, we are only as strong as we are united, only as weak as we are divided. Lord Voldemort's gift for spreading discord and enmity is very great. We can only fight it by showing an equally strong bond of friendship and trust. Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are united and our hearts are open" (723). This message, or plea, is, of course, reiterated by the Sorting Hat's new song in OoP, and I think the upcoming marriage between Fleur and Bill, as well as the romantic link between Hagrid and Madame Maxime, exemplifies that unity and perhaps foreshadows other bonds to come (the continuing friendship between Hermione and Viktor?). Karkaroff is dead, no loss to the WW, but the Durmstrang students know how to sail their ship through the underground passage to the Hogwarts Lake. (Whether that's a security breach or a way to receive unexpected aid form unlikely allies remains to be seen.) I'm focusing on the aftermath of Voldemort's return and Cedric's murder, but that's because I don't remember much mention of the Durmstrang students (other than Viktor) in the rest of the book. However, we do have the Yule Ball, where no one except the jealous Ron (and maybe some envious girls) objected to Viktor's date being Hermione, and we have the hordes of fangirls trailing Viktor throughout the year. Cedric Diggory, a Hufflepuff, escorts the Ravenclaw Cho Chang to the Yule Ball, and Fleur's date is another Ravenclaw, Roger Davies, rather than a boy from her own school. Parvati, a Gryffindor, is finally asked to dance by a Beauxbatons boy (not a Durmstrang student, as in the film) and her Ravenclaw twin Padma is quickly paired off with one of his friends. International magical cooperation on a personal level. Of course, we don't see much of the Durmstrang students other than Viktor thanks to Harry's pov, but there's no indication of hostility among the various schools, and I see no reason to assume that the students confined their dance partners and dates to members of their own schools or Houses. What evidence we have suggests the contrary. At any rate, Karkaroff is certainly a former DE whose apparent reformation is as self-serving and cowardly as Wormtail's return to Voldemort, if less dangerous to other citizens of the WW. But I don't think we can judge his students by their headmaster, especially if Viktor Krum is representative of the Durmstrang student body. It's only Draco, after all, who tells us that the Dark Arts are actually taught at Durmstrang, and Krum Crucios Cedric under the influence of a very powerful Imperius Curse (which may give him powers he wouldn't ordinarily have, as well as controlling his will). I don't think we can conclude that Krum, a self-effacing person who seems genuinely to care about Hermione and to regret what happened to Cedric, had mastered the Cruciatus Curse as part of the Hogwarts curriculum. If Durmstrang were a DE training ground, we'd have a lot more Antonin Dolohovs and fewer Averys and CrabbenGoyles to worry about (or not). Carol, who thinks that Durmstrang should not be judged by appearances and that it, or at least Krum, will prove a valuable ally in the fight against Voldemort in DH, thanks to Dumbledore's efforts to promote international magical cooperation (and his forgiveness of Viktor Krum as illustrated in the speech at the banquet) From sam2sar at charter.net Thu Feb 8 18:08:14 2007 From: sam2sar at charter.net (Stephanie) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:08:14 -0000 Subject: Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164750 As I have been going through the latest messages I am very impressed with the talent and thought of my fellow members and like others I am very excited about the upcoming release of DH. To celebrate, I am going to read one chapter a day until I have the great book in my hands. There are 162 days left and there are 162 chapters, not including the school books. I feel my post-Potter depression lifting and it feels great. > va32h wonders: > I really don't think there is anything wrong with wanting to know > *more*, I just don't understand why people can't be content to just > fill in the blanks for themselves on stuff that is really, ultimately > unimportant. Those missing Gryffindor girls - who cares? If they have > to have names, call them Ann and Betty and be done with it. Or, just > decide that there are only three girls in Harry's year. Those girls > are never mentioned, because they don't matter. > > What is the Fat Lady's backstory? No idea. Maybe it would be fun to > invent one - surely just as fun as working out ways that Harry could > be an accidental horcrux. Sam2sar here I don't think those details are essential but I still want to know. I am very curios and I feel that those little detail will make the story complete and help provide closure. If too many details are left out I will feel let down. Harry has been in my life from before I became married and had kids. He is like a very good friend and when DH has been read I am sure that I will feel like I have lost a close friend. That is why I want the little details, I know little thing about my friends and love them for it > va32h, who is too busy trying not to think about how Dementors breed to worry how they dig a grave. Sam2sar here More then that I wonder how you tell the difference between the male and female dementors. I doubt any one wants to lift up their robes. (shudders) From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Thu Feb 8 16:05:53 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 11:05:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Karkarof as Headmaster v Snape as Headmaster WAS: Snape&Lucius References: Message-ID: <000a01c74b9b$03112da0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164751 --Alla wrote-- >>>Raises her hand. Since I most definitely shudder in horror for poor children, especially those who may have the misfortune to have parents whose Snape hated at some point at their life, when I imagine Snape as Headmaster, and said so in response to your joking idea, I just wish to say that disagreeing with the idea, hoping that the idea does not come true does not mean berating *you* for it.<<< Ronin: I was actually not referring to your response where you made it clear that you "hoped" it wouldn't happen. Rather, someone else went on in great length about how JKR was an idiot if it happened and that I must be crazy because I we, (JKR & I) support child abuse. I can certainly understand somebody hoping that Snape is not made headmaster, but the person I was referring to as berating me took it much further than hoping . But, not to rehash that topic as it seems to have died. Disagreement is what makes the discussion more interesting. I think we are all here to exchange different views and not simply to confirm each other's theories and stroke egos. I respect your hopes that Snape is never made headmaster and in fact I would not send my children to him either. I just thought that the person who originally responded to my theory was overly abrasive in their response. --Alla wrote-- >>>And why should this necessarily be a joke? If you want Snape to be a Headmaster, it is your right to wish for it it (and several people did in non joking way), just as it is my right to hope that this wil never come true and that Snape will pay for all he did to the characters I like. <<< Ronin: I was actually just joking and saying that it was a possibility. I don't want it to happen. I was merely making a point that Snape didn't have to die because his role in life was changing. Somebody suggested he might write textbooks which is an idea I really like. Just look how much more Harry learned from him when he wasn't faced with his personality every day in HBP. --Alla wrote-- >>>Karkarof, hmmm. Yes, Dumbledore totally treats him courteously, but despite all the talk about magical cooperation,etc, I did not get an impression that Durmstrang as school is being treated very courteously. IMO of course, but I think Krum is portrayed as exception, nice guy and all that. I can be wrong, but Durmstrang is a school that teaches Dark Arts, the school where Lucius wanted to send his kid, etc. Nope, I think that former DE as Headmaster does not reflect this school in good light. Does not mean that all kids there are bad of course, but again in my opinion.<<< Ronin: True, having a former Death Eater for a headmaster doesn't portray the school in a good light. Unless I suppose your family were supporters of the dark arts. Hogwarts has had headmasters who leaned towards the dark arts before. Salazaar Slytherin, was one of the founders of the school. Phineas Nigellus was also a Slytherin (which doesn't really make him a DE), but wasn't almost everyone in the Black family associated with the dark arts or a supporter of Lord Voldemort? I had the impression that the Durmstrang students were treated alright. THey seemed to be awed by the Hogwarts students because of Krum's celebrity. I felt that Karkarof himself was a bit cold and ruthless, but the students seemed alright. This is really subject to interpretation though as we will all have different views of Drumstrang. I would prefer to see it as an opportunity. Having a dark arts practitioner as head master might better prepare the students for facing a dark wizard. This, provided he didn't practice the dark arts on his students. But it's really like Harry said...it's much different to actually use DADA rather than study it in theory. Having teachers who have been there and done it would be an asset. In my opinion. Cheers, Ronin From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Thu Feb 8 18:46:10 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 10:46:10 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Room for Debate (ws Re: J.K. Rowling Comments ) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702081046m52383c32w42a4ad3c341f21cb@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164752 As I have been going through the latest messages I am very impressed with the talent and thought of my fellow members and like others I am very excited about the upcoming release of DH. To celebrate, I am going to read one chapter a day until I have the great book in my hands. There are 162 days left and there are 162 chapters, not including the school books. I feel my post-Potter depression lifting and it feels great. > va32h wonders: > I really don't think there is anything wrong with wanting to know > *more*, I just don't understand why people can't be content to just > fill in the blanks for themselves on stuff that is really, ultimately > unimportant. Those missing Gryffindor girls - who cares? If they have > to have names, call them Ann and Betty and be done with it. Or, just > decide that there are only three girls in Harry's year. Those girls > are never mentioned, because they don't matter. > > What is the Fat Lady's backstory? No idea. Maybe it would be fun to > invent one - surely just as fun as working out ways that Harry could > be an accidental horcrux. Sam2sar here I don't think those details are essential but I still want to know. I am very curios and I feel that those little detail will make the story complete and help provide closure. If too many details are left out I will feel let down. Harry has been in my life from before I became married and had kids. He is like a very good friend and when DH has been read I am sure that I will feel like I have lost a close friend. That is why I want the little details, I know little thing about my friends and love them for it > va32h, who is too busy trying not to think about how Dementors breed to worry how they dig a grave. Sam2sar here More then that I wonder how you tell the difference between the male and female dementors. I doubt any one wants to lift up their robes. (shudders) ============================= Jeremiah: Yuck. I got totally grossed out when I read that the Dementors are breeding. As far as telling the male from the female (assuming they have that kind of delineation) it's probably in their "rattle." Assuming a hetero-normative approach... boy dementors have a deeper rattle? I know the whole "mating" thing freaks people out where they are concerned. I would have thought it was like this one species of lizards her ein the US (and there are other species that do this, but this is one I have heard about) where all the lizards are female and they all lay eggs and the eggs just hatch. I'd hate to have to imagine a Demetor mating ritual... Dinner, a movie, suck some sould out of unsuspecting people and then... I don't hink they'd have a good-night kiss, though. Might be a bit tricky. I also have wondered how Dumbledore didn't know about the secret passage behind the Witch with the Hump. And, I know this will be a bit of a shocker, so pay attention... what was the yellow tent-like thing Hargid was knitting on the tube? I'm a knitter (and a boy knitter, to boot) and I want to know! Was it a sweater? An afghan? A blanket for his pumpkins? Maybe a doggie sweater for Fang (can't you see Fang sporting a bright, canary yellow sweater)? Maybe a present for Aragog... or maybe he was actually knitting a tent... JKR! Waht was it! Jeremiah: who loves all the knitting in the books and covets all the cool knitting in the movies, too. (And thanks for the kind words, Carol. Poor Imbridge... she's just misunderstood and needs some kindness. Or a good thrashing... either way...) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Feb 8 19:21:57 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:21:57 -0000 Subject: Sexist JKR? Was Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164753 Cas-e > > There are a lot of interviews in the record in which JKR has promised > us new and fascinating information on both Lilly and Petunia, and > (thanks to Pippen), apparently, even Minerva, but so far, as far as > I'm concerned, she's delivered bupkiss. And she's down to her last > book. If I don't see some substantial effort at making good on these > teasing hints in the final installment (and why do we even have to > wait this long?) I'm going to be very disappointed, and will have to > revise my opinion of JKR's talents and literary contribution > accordingly, downward. > Pippin: JKR has herself worked as a teacher, a stay-home mom, and has said she put a lot of herself into Hermione and Ginny. Maybe what concerns her is not seeing women as limited to traditional roles but raising our consciousness about the way we view traditional roles for women as limiting. For example, just because Molly isn't Stepford perfect doesn't mean she's a desperate housewife who would rather be doing anything else. Ginny was shy in CoS, but canon never said she was sweet, simple and unassuming. In fact there are things in CoS that can't be explained except by Devious!Ginny. But the assumption that shy little girls must be sweet and simple is so powerful that many people complained that Ginny had a personality tranplant. Swottiness and being a goody two shoes don't necessarily go together, but the assumption that they do is so powerful that some readers are wondering whether JKR thinks everything Hermione does is okay. As for McGonagall, I think the possibility of ESE!ness is a red herring for the real ESE!Character. But though it's easy to see her as limited to the role of Dumbledore's faithful second (as Umbridge did) I think we're going to see now that she has ideas of her own. She seems to have a more collegiate, consensus building management style than Dumbledore did. If she starts warming up to Slughorn or Slytherin House in an attempt to unite the Houses as the Sorting Hat advised, I can see Harry starting to suspect her of ESE!ness. But it may be left to McGonagall to do what Dumbledore, with his (as I see it) rather rigid heirarchical approach, could not. Pippin From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 19:48:55 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:48:55 -0000 Subject: HeadMaster Snape & The Battle of Hogwarts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164754 I see people are debating the merits of Snape ever becoming Headmaster of Hogwarts or any other school. I have long had a theory, and if this theory is true, Snape could very well become Headmaster of Hogwarts. --- PS/SS, Am Ed, PB, pg 68 --- Hagrid is speaking... "One of the only safe places left was Hogwarts. Reckon Dumbledore's the onl one You-Know-Who was afraid of. Didn't dare try taking the school, not just then, anyway." - - - end quote - - - It seem clear from the very beginning that Hogwarts was fair game. It was considered a strategic target in the battle for control of the wizard world; he who controls the school controls the students, he who controls the students controls the parent, and he who controls the parents controls the wizard world. Dumbledore is gone, and that represents a grave threat to Hogwarts security. I can't believe that Voldemort is so stupid he can't see that. Holding the school hostage is the same as holding the wizard world hostage. It would seem that if Voldemort took control of the school, it wouldn't be long before the wizard world would have no choice but to surrender. So, I say Voldemort will gain control of the school, but Voldemort sees himself as far too important to waste his time dealing with a bunch of unruley students. So, logically, he will appoint his own Headmaster which of course will be Snape; some one experienced with, known to the students, and feared by them. Bada-Bing Bada-Boom -- Snape is Headmaster. Which brings us to the Battle of Hogwarts, which of course is actually two battles, one for Voldemort to capture the school and one for Harry to win it back. I see all kinds of story potential here. Ginny, Neville, and Luna will likely be inside the school. I suspect very firmly that Harry will resurect the Magic Communication Mirrors and give one to everyone he needs to communicate with, which naturally will include Ginny. This give Harry a way to communicate with people inside the school and find out what is going on, and to hatch a plan to rescue everyone. It also opens the door for Harry to enter the school by stealth using the Tunnel behind the mirror, the one that is currently cave in. No sense digging it out for just a bit of mischief making, but rescuing Hogwarts is certainly justification enough to open it up. I doubt that it will be guarded because people know it is caved in and therefore useless. Useless of course unless you UN-cave it in. Here we have a reference to the school being a strategic target and having a immense strategic advantage on page 68 of the first books. The one thing that protected Hogwarts, Dumbledore, is gone. Certainly, Voldemort must see Hogwarts as both valuable and vulnerable. Now the question is, will The Final Battle of Hogwart represent the climax of the book, or will it just be a minor battle along the way? Does this provide a way for Snape to finally prove that he is really on Harry's side? Under these circumstances, having Snape as Headmaster is advantagious to Harry and to the movement of the story. Still I've predicted so many battles and attacks for the last book, there hardly seems room for them all. Attack on Privet Drive, attack at the Weasley Wedding, maybe an attack on Grimmauld Place, attack to capture Hogwarts, attack to free Hogwarts, and of course, the final climatic battle scene. That's a lot of battles. Steve/bboyminn From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 8 19:50:44 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:50:44 -0000 Subject: Sexist JKR? Was Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164755 > Pippin: > JKR has herself worked as a teacher, a stay-home mom, and has > said she put a lot of herself into Hermione and Ginny. Maybe what > concerns her is not seeing women as limited to traditional roles > but raising our consciousness about the way we view traditional > roles for women as limiting. > > For example, just because Molly isn't Stepford perfect > doesn't mean she's a desperate housewife who would rather > be doing anything else. Magpie: She clearly wouldn't rather be doing anything else, as I read her. I expect if she had to she would get a job or whatever, but there's no suggestion to me that she feels unfulfilled in her role. She's a character who could fit just as easily into a story from a 19th century world where women's roles were more limited--but I don't think she's being set up as bad because of that. Pippin: > Ginny was shy in CoS, but canon never said she was > sweet, simple and unassuming. In fact there are things in CoS > that can't be explained except by Devious!Ginny. But the > assumption that shy little girls must be sweet and simple > is so powerful that many people complained that Ginny > had a personality tranplant. Magpie: She did have a personality transplant.:-) IMO, of course--but my opinion had nothing to do with my thinking shy little girls must be sweet or simple. I based my idea of Ginny's personality on the things she actually did and said, which are slightly to the left of PS-GoF in OotP/HBP. Starting with the fact that the "real" Ginny isn't shy (I would say Ginny I was sweeter than her counterpart, but sweeter doesn't have to mean simpler. I actually find this version flatter and simpler). I think Ginny was meant to be a humorous portrayal of the way girls grow up, fitting neatly into most of the stuff JKR says about girls/boys in the books. She was clearly banking on surprising us with Ginny's personality--how could she not when it was purposefully hidden from our pov character and he comments on it in canon?--so I don't think that can come down to any faults on the reader's part. One could just as easily say that it's JKR who has negative associations with shy girls given the change in the character. We don't know. Pippin: > Swottiness and being a goody two shoes don't necessarily go > together, but the assumption that they do is so powerful that > some readers are wondering whether JKR thinks everything > Hermione does is okay. Magpie: I don't see that being the reason people think JKR thinks everything Hermione does is okay. They think that because some of Hermione's actions that they consider the most disturbing aren't things she's called on and for a lot of people they're something to cheer. The fact that they wonder if they're wrong about that suggests they're giving JKR a chance there. I don't think anyone's ever argued that Hermione's being a swot or a goody-two-shoes means she ought to be morally superior. (Though I have heard people argue that she is morally superior as evidenced by her occasional interest in rules.) Pippin: > As for McGonagall, I think the possibility of ESE!ness is > a red herring for the real ESE!Character. But though it's > easy to see her as limited to the role of Dumbledore's faithful > second (as Umbridge did) I think we're going to see now that > she has ideas of her own. She seems to have a more collegiate, > consensus building management style than Dumbledore did. > > If she starts warming up to Slughorn or Slytherin House in an > attempt to unite the Houses as the Sorting Hat advised, I > can see Harry starting to suspect her of ESE!ness. But > it may be left to McGonagall to do what Dumbledore, with > his (as I see it) rather rigid heirarchical approach, could not. Magpie: If that red-herring is something the author put in on purpose, that is. It might just be another "Snape's a vampire." But I would guess JKR sees McGonagall as a perfectly strong character without being ESE, if by "strong" one means a person able to take care of herself and deal with stressful situations. She's shown to be better at her job than plenty of male characters, and to be able to hold authority over male characters. She has a soft spot for some, but so do most people in the HP-verse. She's just not so far a very important player in the story. -m From sam2sar at charter.net Thu Feb 8 20:18:43 2007 From: sam2sar at charter.net (Stephanie) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 20:18:43 -0000 Subject: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164756 As I begin my chapter a day project I have already amassed a few questions of things I would like to know eventually, even if they are not in DH. I wonder if Lily and Petunia were married about the same time since Dudley and Harry are about the same age. Did they go to each others weddings? It seems that Lily and Petunia had at least a minimum amount of contact, how else would Petunia know about Harry. If Vernon detests wizards so much why would Petunia tell him anything about her sister? Did her jealousy of Lily drive her to go in the opposite direction and marry Vernon. I am also shocked that Vernon didn't realize wizards for what they were. I guess he was in denial. It also appears that there are quite a few wizards in Little Whinging. Do some of them have muggle jobs? They could make some money using their magic to speed things along. And the most important, What was in the LETTER??? From iam.kemper at gmail.com Thu Feb 8 20:38:38 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 12:38:38 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] HeadMaster Snape & The Battle of Hogwart In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40702081238n7655180an6e8017101f4a691@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164757 > Steve wrote > ... > > --- PS/SS, Am Ed, PB, pg 68 --- > Hagrid is speaking... > > "One of the only safe places left was Hogwarts. Reckon > Dumbledore's the onl one You-Know-Who was afraid of. > Didn't dare try taking the school, not just then, > anyway." > > - - - end quote - - - > > It seem clear from the very beginning that Hogwarts > was fair game. It was considered a strategic target in > the battle for control of the wizard world; he who > controls the school controls the students, he who > controls the students controls the parent, and he who > controls the parents controls the wizard world. > > ... > > So, I say Voldemort will gain control of the school, but > Voldemort sees himself as far too important to waste his > time dealing with a bunch of unruley students. So, > logically, he will appoint his own Headmaster which of > course will be Snape; some one experienced with, known > to the students, and feared by them. > > Bada-Bing Bada-Boom -- Snape is Headmaster. > > ... > > Now the question is, will The Final Battle of Hogwart > represent the climax of the book, or will it just be > a minor battle along the way? Does this provide a > way for Snape to finally prove that he is really on > Harry's side? > ... > > Still I've predicted so many battles and attacks for > the last book, there hardly seems room for them all. > Attack on Privet Drive, attack at the Weasley Wedding, > maybe an attack on Grimmauld Place, attack to capture > Hogwarts, attack to free Hogwarts, and of course, the > final climatic battle scene. That's a lot of battles. Kemper now: I like your speculation and really don't have much to add except to say that all those battles (which seem a reasonable prediction) AND Horcruxes to be found and destroyed. Ahh... lots for JKR to write. Please, 5'3'' 103'' lb tweeny-Jesus, let the last book be a tome. Kemper From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 21:11:42 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 21:11:42 -0000 Subject: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164758 Stephanie wrote: > > I wonder if Lily and Petunia were married about the same time since Dudley and Harry are about the same age. Did they go to each others weddings? It seems that Lily and Petunia had at least a minimum amount of contact, how else would Petunia know about Harry. Carol responds: I don't know about attending each other's weddings, but it does seem that they received each other's wedding and baby announcements. How else would Petunia know that her sister has a son named Harry a month younger than Dudley? (Even Dudley knows the date of Harry's birthday: "I know what day it is!" he says in OoP, IIRC). So, unless Petunia reads the Daily Prophet, which seems extremely unlikely, you must be right about the "minimum amount of contact." Stephanie: > If Vernon detests wizards so much why would Petunia tell him anything about her sister? Carol responds: Maybe Petunia has more common sense than we give her credit for. Maybe rather than waiting, as Seamus Finnigan's mother waits to tell her Muggle husband that she's a witch, Petunia decides to reveal her shameful secret (my sister's a witch!) before their marriage. Doing so would be easier, of course, if Petunia and Vernon grew up in the same neighborhood and Vernon knew that Lily went to a different school from her sister, behaved oddly, and knew at least one "awful boy" who behaved as oddly as she did. Petunia would have to swear Vernon to secrecy and then provide some sort of evidence to corroborate her story (such as frog spawn in Lily's pockets or her wand or her Hogwarts letter) or Vernon would think she was insane. But better to be rejected before their marriage than after it, and she could make a show of being embarrassed and ashamed of her sister. It could even be a test of Vernon's love for her: "Will you still love me if I tell you a terrible secret about my family?" (Vernon's one virtue, IMO, is that he really does love Petunia. At times, he even seems a bit afraid of her. Maybe she's afraid she'll stop loving him, as Petunia is afraid that Dudley will stop loving *her* if she doesn't give in to his tantrums? It seems to be a family failing.) Stephanie: > Did her jealousy of Lily drive her to go in the opposite direction and marry Vernon. Carol: Certainly, he's the ArchMuggle, as unmagical as you can get, the perfect person for her to marry on the rebound if she were rejected by a wizard. But what wizard of Lily's acquaintance would be attracted to Petunia, who has neither looks nor personality nor brains to compensate for the "magical blood" that her sister has and she doesn't? (Actually, I can see a romance between Petunia and Peter Pettigrew. Makes a nice set of names for a married couple, doesn't it? But I don't see any evidence for such an attraction nor for the attraction between her and severus snape than some people have speculated about. How about handsome Sirius, who would probably find Petunia about as attractive as a Thestral?) > Stephanie: > I am also shocked that Vernon didn't realize wizards for what they were. I guess he was in denial. Carol: Not necessarily. If his only acquaintance with the WW comes via Lily, he may not know how wizards ordinarily dress. But, yes, he seems to be in near-permanent denial regarding his wife's relatives and even the existence of magic. ("Motorcycles don't fly!" and all that.) And the last thing he wants to hear is news of Petunia's relatives (the Potters and their son, Harry, even if it's bad news--and given Dedalus Diggle's "this happy, happy day!" he has no reason to suspect bad news at this point). (At least, I think that was Dedalus Diggle, who is mentioned by McGonagall and appears in person in the Leaky Cauldron later in SS/PS). Stephanie: It also appears that there are quite a few wizards in Little Whinging. Do some of them have muggle jobs? Carol: I'm not so sure that Vernon works in Little Whinging. He could work elsewhere in Surrey or even London, which I think is within easy commuting distance (Vernon drives to work). If his office is anywhere near Diagon Alley, he'd probably see lots of wizards, especially on that particular day when witches and wizards aren't even bothering to disguise themselves as Muggles (at which they seem to be inept, in any case). It's also possible that the wizards Vernon saw were Order members sent by DD to keep an eye on Vernon. At any rate, I think that Dedalus Diggle, whom we know to be the person who shook hand with Harry in a shop, and possibly the witch he encountered on a bus were Order members keeping an eye on Harry to supplement Mrs. Figg and her cats. Stephanie: > And the most important, What was in the LETTER??? > Carol: *That* much we'll find out. JKR has said of Petunia (as of Snape) that there's more to her than meets the eye even though she's neither a witch nor a Squib and is not the person who'll perform magic "late in life" in the last book. (I'm betting that's Mrs. Figg.) But I think that Petunia will finally let her repressed affection or concern for Harry show itself, that she'll share Dumbledore's letter(s) with him (in gratitude for his saving Dudley's life???), and that she'll tell Harry what she remembers about her sister and "that awful boy." When Vernon is safely at work or in the hospital, of course. Carol, just having fun here and not committed to any of these ideas except Figgy as the one who does magic late in life From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Thu Feb 8 21:18:19 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 13:18:19 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702081318t1459510ey7f97bb13e661a30b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164759 I wonder if Lily and Petunia were married about the same time since Dudley and Harry are about the same age. Did they go to each others weddings? It seems that Lily and Petunia had at least a minimum amount of contact, how else would Petunia know about Harry. If Vernon detests wizards so much why would Petunia tell him anything about her sister? Did her jealousy of Lily drive her to go in the opposite direction and marry Vernon. I am also shocked that Vernon didn't realize wizards for what they were. I guess he was in denial. It also appears that there are quite a few wizards in Little Whinging. Do some of them have muggle jobs? They could make some money using their magic to speed things along. And the most important, What was in the LETTER??? _______________________________ Jeremiah: Hmmm... well, i don't know about getting married at the same time... I always liked to think that Lily and James had a "shot-gun" wedding. As sweet as everyone says they are I still have no qualms believing that Harry's birthday was a good reason for them to get hitched. LOL. (jsut my bit of humor, there... but viable, I'd say). Well, I'm sure Petunia and Vernon were invited to Lily's wedding and Petunia had to tell vernon at some point. You can't pretend you don't have any family, now, can you? Or, more likely, I'd assume Vernon heard Petunia's mum & dad saying, "Why can't you find someone more fun, like your sister did with that Potter guy. We like him..." and then the revelation occurs... LOL. Vernon being ignorant about anything should not come as a shock to anyone. LOL!! He's a dingleberry-head who needs the stupid slapped out of him. Any way... Id' think there are lots of wizards everywhere but they're good at hiding. However, as far as Little Whingining goes I think we only have the Squib Mrs. Arabella Figg. And, yes, I wonder if they have Muggle jobs, too! I'm sure some of them do and others don't depending on their needs and since we know that Hermonie's parents can exchange Muggle money for Wizard money I think it wouldn' be much of an issue. And that letter... I swear I wish i knew what was in that, too. I'll be Petunia sucks-it-up and lets Harry read it for himself. She's probaly got it in a hat box with some of Lily's letters and photos. If Petunia didn't love her sister on some level then 1) she wouldn't have let Harry live with them and 2) she wouldn't have so much anger towards Lily. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 21:29:39 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 21:29:39 -0000 Subject: Father Figures / Hermione's Path / The Molly Question (long!) (was:Wanted!Comple In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164760 > >zgirnius: > > Lupin was a make or break part of PoA. I would not say he is the > > same to the story as a whole. I don't see that he has had more > > emotional impact on Harry than McG. > > > > Betsy Hp: > I *strongly* disagree. Fandom has never spent time wondering when > McGonagall is going to get off her duff and become a mother-figure > for Harry. But between every book since Lupin's introduction there's > a large group of readers just sure Lupin is going to have a huge role > in the next book as one of Harry's father-figures. I think there's a > reason for that. zgirnius: And in my opinion, his absence in the last three books confirms to me that a certain section of fandom was wrong. Not having been in that (or any other) section of fandom back in the PoA days, I can only guess why that is (as I already have, upthread). My best guess is that this is because he was a way cool friend of James, he has that horrible affliction for us to pity, and he's a nice guy, and fans wanted to see more of him. I read GoF right after PoA, and was not particularly surprised at the lack of Lupin. > BetsyHP: > Part of it has to do with the amount of personal time Lupin spent > with Harry in PoA. Part of it has to do with the emotional > connection Lupin made with Harry: an emotional connection no other > adult has ever made. Lupin was able to slow Harry down while Harry > was in the middle of "mission mode" and get Harry to think. (Once > after sneaking out to Hogsmeade, zgirnius: Lupin, in that scene, was ineffective in (what Sirius suggests is) his usual way. He was able to make Harry feel ashamed, after the fact. (Dumbledore has this same ability, as demonstrated in HBP regarding the Sluggish Memory.) This did not prevent Harry from engaging in further dangerous escapades, as evidenced by the final several chapters of the book. If Harry had taken Lupin's words to heart, he would not have been sneaking around the school grounds and offering Sirius a chance to pounce on Ron. BetsyHP: > and more obviously in the Shrieking Shack.) zgirnius: In the Shack, it seems to me that it was *Harry* who influenced Lupin (by preventing his and Sirius's intended revenge murder of Peter). Harry did listen to Lupin, but this is because he wanted to know the answers Lupin was giving him. If McGonagall had stories to tell him about his father, I daresay he would listen to her as well. He does consider McGonagall's opinions of and probable reactions to his actions, by the way. They don't necessarily influence him, but then neither do Lupin's. > OotP, "Career Advice" > He could just imagine Professor McGonagall's reaction if he were caught trespassing in Professor Umbridge's office mere hours after she had vouched for him.... BatsyHP: > She could have, I think, had JKR chosen to go that route. As Harry's > head of house, McGonagall could well have taken time to get to know > Harry personally and given Harry a chance to get to know her. But > JKR puts Lupin in that role. So when Harry starts teaching himself > in OotP, it's Lupin who buys him some helpful books. And it's Lupin > that we the readers get some background on, and it's Lupin that we > spend time talking about. zgirnius: We learn nothing about Lupin that does not relate directly to either James, or the Order's activities. The Prank, Marauding, SWM, spying on werewolves... OK, in HBP we learn Tonks has fallen for him, and Harry is the last to know. > Betsy Hp: > Snape is a *major* player in Harry's father-figure olympics. zgirnius: No argument there. And hey, we even learn things about his background that don't have anything to do with Harry's parents or the Order! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 21:38:55 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 21:38:55 -0000 Subject: HeadMaster Snape & The Battle of Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164761 "Steve" wrote: > > I see people are debating the merits of Snape ever > becoming Headmaster of Hogwarts or any other school. I > have long had a theory, and if this theory is true, Snape > could very well become Headmaster of Hogwarts. > It seem clear from the very beginning that Hogwarts > was fair game. It was considered a strategic target in > the battle for control of the wizard world; he who > controls the school controls the students, he who > controls the students controls the parent, and he who > controls the parents controls the wizard world. > > Dumbledore is gone, and that represents a grave threat > to Hogwarts security. I can't believe that Voldemort is > so stupid he can't see that. > So, I say Voldemort will gain control of the school, but > Voldemort sees himself as far too important to waste his > time dealing with a bunch of unruley students. So, > logically, he will appoint his own Headmaster which of > course will be Snape; some one experienced with, known > to the students, and feared by them. > > Bada-Bing Bada-Boom -- Snape is Headmaster. > > Which brings us to the Battle of Hogwarts, which of > course is actually two battles, one for Voldemort to > capture the school and one for Harry to win it back. > > Now the question is, will The Final Battle of Hogwart > represent the climax of the book, or will it just be > a minor battle along the way? Does this provide a > way for Snape to finally prove that he is really on > Harry's side? > > Under these circumstances, having Snape as Headmaster > is advantagious to Harry and to the movement of the > story. > Carol responds: I really like this idea, in part because it makes Snape highly visible and because it enables him to "slither out of action" of the murder-and-torture variety, which would be highly detrimental to DDM!Snape, and because it sets up an emotionally charged encounter between Snape and Harry. Snape could even enlist the aid of the portraits and use, say, Portrait!Phineas as an intermediary between Hogwarts and the Order while still pretending to be loyal to Voldemort (it's an advantage even to a superb Legilimens like Snape not to be under Voldemort's snaky eye(s). (I considered the idea of Snape working with his seeming rival Bellatrix to engineer a DE escape from Azkaban, during or after which he would subvert Lucius Malfoy and a few others to rebel against Voldemort, but I like your idea even better because it recenters the action on Hogwarts.) Steve: > Still I've predicted so many battles and attacks for > the last book, there hardly seems room for them all. > Attack on Privet Drive, attack at the Weasley Wedding, > maybe an attack on Grimmauld Place, attack to capture > Hogwarts, attack to free Hogwarts, and of course, the > final climatic battle scene. That's a lot of battles. Carol: We're definitely set up for the Battle of Privet Drive on the early morning of Harry's seventeenth birthday, but I don't think we'll see battles in all those other locations. 12 GP is still protected by the Fidelius Charm, and the Order will know that supposedly ESE!Snape still can't reveal the location, so I think that will be a safe place for the Dursleys and any other Voldie victims who were told the location before the SK's death. Nor do I think we'll see an attack on the Weasley wedding, which can easily be kept a secret (it would be suicide to put an announcement in the Daily Prophet and folly to invite Madame Maxime to fly in with her Abraxian horses. Keep it quiet, all in the family. (Maybe we'll get Repentant!Percy now that DD is dead.) But Hogwarts, the scene of Dumbledore's murder and the primary setting of all the books so far, is an ideal setting for a major battle--not the climax, which will probably involve only Harry and a post-Nagini Voldie at the MoM, but nevertheless an important battle midway through the book, the moment in which the promised major deaths, or at least some of them, occur. Carol, who doesn't expect a "bloodbath" but does interpret JKR's unplanned deaths remark as implying planned deaths as well From muellem at bc.edu Fri Feb 9 00:50:23 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 00:50:23 -0000 Subject: Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) In-Reply-To: <001301c74b9c$6b1443a0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164762 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ronin_47" wrote: > > > --Ronin's Comments-- > This is excellent. I wish I had my copy of GOF here so I could read the exact passages, but I loaned it to a friend who's son took it into the bath and I have yet to replace it. > Anyway, this makes a lot of sense. It also makes me wonder if Snape and Wormtail were secretly friendly during their Hogwarts days. It seemed obvious at the time that Wormtail took pleasure from watching James humiliate Snape. This makes me detest Wormtail all the more. > Snape seems to openly loathe Wormtail, even in front of other Death Eaters. I had assumed it was because nobody has respect for Wormtail. But Wormtail was a Gryffindor, wasn't he? > There must be someone, other than Snape, who were Slytherins in Snape's same year. > colebiancardi: what about Barty Crouch Jr? I hate the one liner, but he was someone who was a DE - since Snape called him by his first name in GoF, it leads me to believe that Snape & Jr were on friendly terms and could have been in the same house and the same age. from the Am Ed hardcover of GoF, page 683 "Crouch!" Snape said, stopping dead in the doorway. "Barty Crouch!" colebiancardi(who thinks that most of the DE's that could be around Snape's age are either dead from the first war or in Azkaban) From kristy at damayos.org Thu Feb 8 23:40:34 2007 From: kristy at damayos.org (Kristy) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 23:40:34 -0000 Subject: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164763 > Stephanie: > > And the most important, What was in the LETTER??? > > > Carol: > *That* much we'll find out. JKR has said of Petunia (as of Snape) that > there's more to her than meets the eye even though she's neither a > witch nor a Squib and is not the person who'll perform magic "late in > life" in the last book. (I'm betting that's Mrs. Figg.) But I think > that Petunia will finally let her repressed affection or concern for > Harry show itself, that she'll share Dumbledore's letter(s) with him > (in gratitude for his saving Dudley's life???), and that she'll tell > Harry what she remembers about her sister and "that awful boy." When > Vernon is safely at work or in the hospital, of course. > > Carol, just having fun here and not committed to any of these ideas > except Figgy as the one who does magic late in life > Kristy: I kind of have a theory about Petunia being "more than meets the eye". I think Lily and Petunia's parents were both squibs, which is why they would be so excited about having a witch in the family and also why Petunia knows more about the wizard world than a normal muggle would (even one with a witch for a sister.) Oh, and my guess on the person performing magic late in life was Filch (Mrs. Figg was my second guess though.) From moosiemlo at gmail.com Fri Feb 9 01:54:09 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 17:54:09 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Deadly hollows JKR's "FAVORITE BOOK" of the series!. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0702081754g4afff9f1s6198cf8c07e2171f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164764 Eggplant: after all, nobody really enjoys reading the Bible > or The Quotations Of Chairman Mao Lynda: I've neither looked for, nor plan to make it a point to find the Qoatations of Chairman Mao, but as for the Bible, I read it daily, of my own free will, not because my faith says I have to but because I like reading the Bible. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From va32h at comcast.net Fri Feb 9 02:09:42 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 02:09:42 -0000 Subject: Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164765 > colebiancardi: > > what about Barty Crouch Jr? I hate the one liner, but he was someone > who was a DE - since Snape called him by his first name in GoF, it > leads me to believe that Snape & Jr were on friendly terms and could > have been in the same house and the same age. > > from the Am Ed hardcover of GoF, page 683 > > "Crouch!" Snape said, stopping dead in the doorway. "Barty Crouch!" > > colebiancardi(who thinks that most of the DE's that could be around > Snape's age are either dead from the first war or in Azkaban) > Good catch there - I had forgotten about Barty Jr. He was about 19 at his Pensieve trial, so he would have been Regulus' age, a couple years younger than Snape. But we have no idea which house. It is interesting that Snape recognized him; I thought DEs weren't supposed to know each other by sight. But then, Karkaroff was able to name plenty of names, and of course Barty Jr. was working with the Lestranges at the time of his arrest. va32h From dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 8 21:39:17 2007 From: dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com (dragonkeeper) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 13:39:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <143908.58104.qm@web53308.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164766 Along a different line of reasoning, I have to ask this now; Did Petunia and Lily's parents accept Vernon because he is muggle? I don't think Petunia told the whole story and there is far more than we understand. David --------------------------------- Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Fri Feb 9 00:59:06 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 19:59:06 -0500 Subject: Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) References: Message-ID: <001f01c74be5$807e3fe0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164767 --Carol wrote-- >>>It's only Draco, after all, who tells us that the Dark Arts are actually taught at Durmstrang, and Krum Crucios Cedric under the influence of a very powerful Imperius Curse (which may give him powers he wouldn't ordinarily have, as well as controlling his will). I don't think we can conclude that Krum, a self-effacing person who seems genuinely to care about Hermione and to regret what happened to Cedric, had mastered the Cruciatus Curse as part of the Hogwarts curriculum. If Durmstrang were a DE training ground, we'd have a lot more Antonin Dolohovs and fewer Averys and CrabbenGoyles to worry about (or not). <<< --Ronin's comments-- Your post is excellent. Just to add a couple of observations; Draco's tales don't mean much. Draco has a habit of boasting about these types of things and it turns out to be completely false. For example, during OWLs, he bragged that his father was great friends with Griselda Marchbanks and that she'd see to it he pulled through his OWLs alright. But it turned out that Neville's grandmother was actually friends with Marchbanks and she was not associated with the Malfoys. (Thankfully) My other comment goes to the type of students attended the other schools. It's been a while since I've read GOF, so I hope my recollection isn't too clouded by the movie which I've seen recently. I thought that the Durmstrang students may have been portrayed as barbarians (speaking of their manners). I wondered if this was to magnify the differences between the cultures at Durmstrang and Beuxbatons and show how Hogwarts was a sort of middle ground where all were welcome and treated equally. By the end of the TWT, we see dramatic changes in all of the students. I.E. Fleur, who was so untouchable at the beginning, is now a friend of Harry and Ron because of her "little seester". And Krum, who was a dumb jock was now a charming gentleman asking Hermione to write him. We know that Beubatons is now allied with Hogwarts, but I wonder who is the new headmaster of Durmstrang and what is their position on this? I got the feeling that the Durmstrang students left on good terms with the other schools and made friends, but a new headmaster could make or break the whole effort. I'm going to have to get a new copy of GOF and read it again soon. The movie has definitely clouded my memory where Karkarof is concerned. I remember that in the book, he was not the DE who was on trial in the pensieve. He only pretended to reform out of self preservation. He was even more dispicable than Wormtail. If that's possible. Anyway, I thoroughly enjoyed your post. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Fri Feb 9 01:28:44 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 20:28:44 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) References: Message-ID: <004d01c74be9$a3e426d0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164768 --Celia wrote-- >>>My point being, I think it is possible that Narcissa or Lucius or Regulus may have been a "friend" of Severus during school, but that might not mean they would be willing to stick their neck out for him in a situation like the post-OWLS humiliation. And if we know one thing for sure about our dear Severus, it is that he knows how to shut of his emotions from connecting to anyone else and is very protective of himself (occlumency *and* legilimancy, after all), so his version of "friendship" may be very limited. <<< --Ronin's comments-- Interesting ideas. Maybe Narcissa was friends with Snape before Lucius, in a non-romantic way. It could even be Snape that introduced her to Malfoy. Since she is a relative of Sirius's, I wonder if Snape didn't make friends with several of Sirius's relatives since they all had their hatred for Sirius in common and were all members of Slytherin. I was thinking of the post-OWLs confrontation more on the terms of other Slytherins standing up for the house of Slytherin. Not so much sticking their necks out for Snape, but for the house's reputation on the whole. At that time, Snape was only a 5th year. I don't think he would've mastered occlumency or legilimancy yet. But I'm sure he had a very thick skin since we've also seen that his home life wasn't much different. It's probably where he learned to be so effective at molding students into such fine young witches & wizards. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From muellem at bc.edu Fri Feb 9 02:34:33 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 02:34:33 -0000 Subject: Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164769 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > > > colebiancardi: > > > > what about Barty Crouch Jr? I hate the one liner, but he was > someone > > who was a DE - since Snape called him by his first name in GoF, it > > leads me to believe that Snape & Jr were on friendly terms and could > > have been in the same house and the same age. > > > > from the Am Ed hardcover of GoF, page 683 > > > > "Crouch!" Snape said, stopping dead in the doorway. "Barty Crouch!" > > > > colebiancardi(who thinks that most of the DE's that could be around > > Snape's age are either dead from the first war or in Azkaban) > > > > > Good catch there - I had forgotten about Barty Jr. He was about 19 at > his Pensieve trial, so he would have been Regulus' age, a couple > years younger than Snape. But we have no idea which house. > > In the GoF, Barty is described as a boy in his late teens. Now is this Harry's interpretation, or is it the actual age? I know when I was 19, I looked like I was about 14 (to my shame). I was still carded at the bar well into my mid-30's(to my glee). So, it could be, although I am just guessing here, that Barty is older than his late teens in the scene. If Barty was not in Slytherin, that would be unusual - after all, the only person who we know is a DE and is not in Slytherin is Wormtail. And it was a big deal in the books. Movie corruption here - Barty's licking of his lips is very snake-like, which makes me think he was of Slytherin house. But you are correct, we don't know of any one who is of Snape's house and year - which, as I stated before, leads me to believe they are all dead or imprisoned. colebiancardi From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 02:39:16 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 02:39:16 -0000 Subject: Snape&Lucius (was Re: Room for Debate) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164770 "va32h" wrote: > It is interesting that Snape recognized him; I thought DEs weren't > supposed to know each other by sight. But then, Karkaroff was able to > name plenty of names, and of course Barty Jr. was working with the > Lestranges at the time of his arrest. > zgirnius: Yes, and the publicity surrounding the Crouch/Lestrange arrests and legal processs must have been enormous. Imagine if the US Attorney General's or Secretary for Homeland Security's son was apprehended for active participation in a plot by Al Qaeda terrorists on US soil. That would be the comparable parallel in the US...anyone with the slightest interest in the war would know their appearance. And Snape would have been interested. From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Feb 9 03:27:36 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 22:27:36 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) References: <001f01c74be5$807e3fe0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: <006801c74bfa$3fc375f0$e680400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164771 > --Carol wrote-- > >>>>It's only Draco, after all, who tells us that the Dark Arts are > actually taught at Durmstrang, and Krum Crucios Cedric under the > influence of a very powerful Imperius Curse (which may give him powers > he wouldn't ordinarily have, as well as controlling his will). I don't > think we can conclude that Krum, a self-effacing person who seems > genuinely to care about Hermione and to regret what happened to > Cedric, had mastered the Cruciatus Curse as part of the Hogwarts > curriculum. If Durmstrang were a DE training ground, we'd have a lot > more Antonin Dolohovs and fewer Averys and CrabbenGoyles to worry > about (or not). > <<< > > > > --Ronin's comments-- > Your post is excellent. > Just to add a couple of observations; Draco's tales don't mean much. > Draco has a habit of boasting about these types of things and it turns out > to be completely false. For example, during OWLs, he bragged that his > father was great friends with Griselda Marchbanks and that she'd see to it > he pulled through his OWLs alright. But it turned out that Neville's > grandmother was actually friends with Marchbanks and she was not > associated with the Malfoys. (Thankfully) Magpie: Actually, I would take Draco at his word there. He does often tell stories that aren't true, but he's also capable of giving us information. Teaching the Dark Arts doesn't necessarily mean all the students are evil. It's just a question of whether you're teaching students about a certain area of magic that Hogwarts doesn't. Even a headmaster not an ex-DE might follow that curriculum. Ronin: My other comment goes to the type of students attended the other schools. It's been a while since I've read GOF, so I hope my recollection isn't too clouded by the movie which I've seen recently. I thought that the Durmstrang students may have been portrayed as barbarians (speaking of their manners). I wondered if this was to magnify the differences between the cultures at Durmstrang and Beuxbatons and show how Hogwarts was a sort of middle ground where all were welcome and treated equally. Magpie: Iirc, Beauxbatons were French stereotypes with good manners and Durmstrang were eastern European and impressed by fancy silverware.:-) That is, they were all very much their countries. Hermione, for instance, didn't like Fleur, especially when she complained about English food as opposed to French food. So rather than Hogwarts being in the middle, it was more like France vs. England vs. Eastern European. (Krum is Bulgarian--with an odd accent--but I don't think everyone from Durmstrang was supposed to be Bulgarian.) -m From elfundeb at gmail.com Fri Feb 9 04:11:09 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 23:11:09 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Father Figures / Hermione's Path / The Molly Question (long!) (was:Wanted!Comple In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0702082011q56311b3ejc9ce32c09d1a6a3c@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164772 Betsy Hp: I feel like this particular thread is breaking into three different discussion points. So I'm going to seperate them out as I see them (cleverly using only one post to do so ) and see what holds interest. Debbie: Ok, I'll bite on some of your hooks. Betsy Hp: Fandom has never spent time wondering when McGonagall is going to get off her duff and become a mother-figure for Harry. But between every book since Lupin's introduction there's a large group of readers just sure Lupin is going to have a huge role in the next book as one of Harry's father-figures. I think there's a reason for that. Part of it has to do with the amount of personal time Lupin spent with Harry in PoA. Part of it has to do with the emotional connection Lupin made with Harry: an emotional connection no other adult has ever made. Lupin was able to slow Harry down while Harry was in the middle of "mission mode" and get Harry to think. (Once after sneaking out to Hogsmeade, and more obviously in the Shrieking Shack.) McGonagall has never done the same. Debbie: To the extent that Lupin did or will occupy the father-figure role, it consisted of his ability to rethink his ill-conceived missions and create a sense of calm. Overall, though, I think we don't see Lupin take on more of a father-figure role because Lupin himself is reluctant to assume that role. In PoA, he only does so when Harry is obviously out of line and in need of correction. Lupin's avoidance of that role is consistent with his overall portrayal. He is an example of a good person whose affliction and status as victim has affected him to the point of near paralysis. He has absorbed the WW's fear of werewolves and turned it into a form of self-loathing, so that *he* believes he is unsuited to teach at Hogwarts. I've wondered how hard Dumbledore had to cajole him to take the DADA position. I bet it was very hard. OTOH, I would not be surprised if he volunteered to go undercover with the other werewolves. He gets to punish himself in the guise of making himself useful. It's also worth pointing out that Lupin's errors are ones of omission. He *didn't* tell Dumbledore about the Marauder's activities. He tried to avoid telling Harry he knew James. And, of course, he didn't take his potion the night of the Shrieking Shack. Being a father-figure to Harry would be too dangerous for him, and it's much easier for him to do nothing. This is one reason I can't buy Pippin's ESE!Lupin story; he's too passive a character to every make an affirmative decision to join the forces of evil. And storywise, he doesn't need to, as his passivity has caused plenty of trouble as it is. See -- I find his flaws very convincing as they are. He exemplifies the evil that ensues when good people do nothing. Betsy Hp: And finally, the big bad, The Molly Question (long!): > >>zgirnius: > Percy was not thrown out, he left, upon attaining his majority, > obtaining a good job, and getting into a huge fight with his > father. Trouble had been brewing there for quite some time, but I'm > not sure what Molly could have done to improve matters. Betsy Hp: Been a good Mom? Delt with the problem as and when it came up? Stopped encouraging her children to look at their father's job (and therefore their father) as a massive joke? Talked with Arthur about his new principles and either come to grips with them or come to some sort of compromise that the two of them could present to their children together instead of deriding and undermining everything Arthur held dear? Not raised her children to believe popularity and money are the two marks of success? Debbie: Molly is hardly the exemplar of perfect motherhood, but as a slightly imperfect mom myself, I'll have to take issue with the wholesale condemnation. Molly did what she thought best under the circumstances. Not all her choices were inspired, and some of them were awful, but she is not neglectful, mean or abusive, and she makes it clear that she loves them all. Those sweaters are a sign of her love, and every one of her kids (including Percy) knows that. As for some of the other points -- I don't see any evidence that she sees Arthur's job as a massive joke. She is frustrated that his views have held him back at the Ministry. She thinks he deserves better. And sometimes that frustration shows, as for example, the dress robes incident. But that doesn't make Arthur, or his job, a joke. I'll admit that Molly and Arthur aren't very effective at the good cop, bad cop means of discipline. Molly's yelling is ineffective, but Arthur's tacit endorsement of some forms of mischief, such as the Twins' taking the Flying Ford Anglia to pick up Harry in CoS, is equally useless. IMO, Molly views government (Ministry) service as a mark of success. Odd, that, since Arthur has not done well by the Ministry at all, but she was quite pleased with Percy's first job and tried to move the Twins in the same direction. As for money being the mark of success, that's not the inference I draw from Molly's actions. Rather, being poor is tough. It's especially tough on the genteel poor, who rub shoulders with more affluent folks on a regular basis. Molly knows this and she knows how her children are affected by it. For example, I think Molly's actions in the infamous dress robes incident in GoF reflect her embarrassment that she is unable to afford anything better for her son, while Harry can afford the best of everything. And all that stuff Arthur has in the garage -- it's probably contraband and Arthur could get himself in trouble if his superiors at the Ministry knew he was enchanting Muggle artifacts in his spare time. If I were Molly I wouldn't be too keen on that either. > >>zgirnius: > Percy being the weakest of her offspring? Or do you mean Ron? I'm > honestly not sure what you mean here. Debbie: Personally, I think Percy is weaker than Ron. Percy can be a bit of a pawn of his current commanding officer, whoever or whatever it may be at the time (Molly, Crouch, Umbridge, rules, you name it). Ron resists expectations, even if he does it passively at times. Betsy Hp: Oh, Ron, definitely. Unlike Percy, Ron fights her. But since he doesn't have the insight (or the makeup) of the twins, he doesn't fight her correctly, in a way she respects. So Molly punishes Ron by either passively ignoring him or actively setting him up as a fool. Debbie: I do have a theory about this. Molly operates on a reward system. All accomplishments -- such as becoming a prefect -- get rewarded. But this system works much better for older children than younger ones. The older kids can be surprised with a reward. Ron, OTOH, knows he'll get nothing unless he measures up to all who have gone before him. Unlike the twins, who have their own built-in support system in each other, can comfortably avoid the system and merrily go their own way. Ron, however, is sensitive. He cares enough to want parental approval, and unfortunately, Molly doesn't give it because he hasn't done anything yet (Percy is like Ron, but he overworks so he'll get the approval, and he is hurt enough to leave in OOP because his promotion got him derision instead of approval). And it's not like she doesn't ever passively ignore the Twins or set them up as fools. When Ron was made prefect, Molly crowed that it was everyone in the family, conveniently ignoring the anti-prefect twins. Betsy Hp: But Molly has no say in Arthur's career decisions. Her strong dislike of his current position contrasts strongly with Arthur's love for it. If it was ever discussed nothing was resolved, IMO. Debbie: I don't read this the same way at all. Molly *does* dislike Arthur's current (former) position, but I think she appreciates that his principles, i.e., his fondness for Muggles, have held him back. I know some people see Molly as not sharing his principles, but I don't agree. I think Ron's very forcefully expressed views on the subject at age 12 reflect what he learned at home. And Molly probably did most of that teaching. Besides, Molly lost two brothers in VWI to the followers of an anti-Muggle maniac. Surely she sees how divisive that sort of thinking is. Betsy Hp (re the Ton-Tongue Toffee incident): By shutting Arthur down, the twins assist their mother (unconsciously of course). I think the twins also help out their mom by beating down the sons that are most linked to Arthur (Percy and Ron) and I think this goes back to the twins and Molly having an oddly symbiotic relationship. Debbie: Interesting thought. I don't see the Weasley kids as linked to one parent or another. I could make a good case that Percy and Ron are like Molly in their sensitivities. For example, of all the Weasleys, the two most outwardly sensitive about the family's poverty are Molly and Ron. (The twins are sensitive *to* it, as when they comment on the cost of all the Lockhart books, but I think it is sensitivity to the drain on their parents; they don't appear embarrassed by the family finances.) The twins are more like Arthur in that they accept their circumstances with more equanimity, and their inventing parallels Arthur's tinkering with Muggle artifacts. Betsy Hp: Molly is not upset about the muggle-baiting, she's upset about the Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes. So the twins (and the trio) merrily move along thinking it's perfectly okay to attack those weaker than you because Arthur forfeits the field to Molly's rather silly point. Arthur is weak and Molly is stupid. Neither are very good parents because of that. Debbie: But Molly only enters at the tail end of the discussion. She has no idea what has happened at the Dursleys. She's just connecting Arthur's fury to the last incident, which was her discovery of the Weasley's Wizard Wheezes order forms in their room. Debbie who could write a dissertation on the Weasley family dynamics, but is trying to spare the list [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 04:09:19 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 04:09:19 -0000 Subject: Father Figures (was: Wanted! Complex Adult Female...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164773 > >>zgirnius: > > > > I don't see that he [Lupin] has had more emotional impact on > > Harry than McG. > > > >>Betsy Hp: > > I *strongly* disagree. Fandom has never spent time wondering > > when McGonagall is going to get off her duff and become a mother- > > figure for Harry. But between every book since Lupin's > > introduction there's a large group of readers just sure Lupin is > > going to have a huge role in the next book as one of Harry's > > father-figures. > > > >>zgirnius: > And in my opinion, his absence in the last three books confirms to > me that a certain section of fandom was wrong. Betsy Hp: They've been wrong about Lupin being a near perfect father-figure for Harry. But Lupin hasn't been completely absent, and whenever he shows up he has an emotional sort of scene with Harry that McGonagall never does. Which is why fandom keeps on waiting. What I find interesting with Lupin and Harry is that it's more Lupin pulling away from Harry, it's Lupin who holds back, while Harry is the one asking for information, for a connection for help. It's like a mirror of the relationship Harry has with Sirius in a way. But either way, McGonagall doesn't have that sort of closeness with Harry. Even the not all that close, closeness, that Harry has with Lupin. McGonagall is the quintessential teacher for Harry, I think: admirable but not entirely human. (I'm picturing a Calvin and Hobbes strip where Calvin is shocked *shocked* to run into his teacher at a grocery store. "She *eats*!?!") And really, I think that's how nearly all Harry's mother-figures come across: not quite real. > >>zgirnius: > Not having been in that (or any other) section of fandom back in > the PoA days, I can only guess why that is (as I already have, > upthread). My best guess is that this is because he was a way cool > friend of James... Betsy Hp: Exactly! Lupin is a very real connection back to Harry's father. By getting to know both Lupin and Sirius, Harry is able to get a tiny bit of connection to his father. Something that both Harry and the readers have had for four books now. While we've only had one book with someone connecting Harry back to his mother. (And that the much more remote Slughorn.) > >>zgirnius: >...he has that horrible affliction for us to pity, and he's a nice > guy, and fans wanted to see more of him. > Betsy Hp: Right, Lupin is a person of interest, because JKR has made Lupin interesting. Because she wants Harry (as well as the readers) interested. So she gives Lupin interesting flaws while McGonagall stays remote and perfect. > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Lupin was able to slow Harry down while Harry was in the middle > > of "mission mode" and get Harry to think. (Once after sneaking > > out to Hogsmeade... > >>zgirnius: > Lupin, in that scene, was ineffective in (what Sirius suggests is) > his usual way. He was able to make Harry feel ashamed, after the > fact. > Betsy Hp: Because he didn't know what Harry was going to do before Harry did it. IIRC, Harry doesn't sneak back into Hogsmeade after Lupin speaks to him. But honestly, Lupin doesn't have to be all that affective. As I've said, none of Harry's father-figures are all that great. They all have rather fatal weaknesses that keep them from being fully capable mentors to Harry. Which makes the story interesting. > >>Betsy Hp: > > ...and more obviously in the Shrieking Shack.) > >>zgirnius: > In the Shack, it seems to me that it was *Harry* who influenced > Lupin (by preventing his and Sirius's intended revenge murder of > Peter). Harry did listen to Lupin, but this is because he wanted to > know the answers Lupin was giving him. If McGonagall had stories to > tell him about his father, I daresay he would listen to her as well. > Betsy Hp: But McGonagall *doesn't* have those stories. Or at least she doesn't share them with Harry. And Lupin is able to stop Harry from doing whatever he was going to do to Sirius and listen to Lupin's story. But that Harry also influences Lupin shows the give and take of their relationship, something else that's missing from Harry's interactions with McGonagall. > >>zgirnius: > He does consider McGonagall's opinions of and probable reactions to > his actions, by the way. They don't necessarily influence him, but > then neither do Lupin's. > > OotP, "Career Advice" > He could just imagine Professor McGonagall's reaction if he were > caught trespassing in Professor Umbridge's office mere hours after > she had vouched for him.... Betsy Hp: Well, yeah. But when Harry is in trouble or is troubled, he doesn't seek out McGonagall. He turns to Lupin or Arthur or Sirius or even Snape. And actually, I think that's part of the reason I don't like Dumbledore as father-figure. He really is too remote. That password on his office entrance, for example. There have been times that Harry needs help or advice and either Dumbledore isn't reachable or Harry's too intimidated to go to him. > >>Betsy Hp: > > She could have, I think, had JKR chosen to go that route. As > > Harry's head of house, McGonagall could well have taken time to > > get to know Harry personally and given Harry a chance to get to > > know her. But JKR puts Lupin in that role. > > > >>zgirnius: > We learn nothing about Lupin that does not relate directly to > either James, or the Order's activities. The Prank, Marauding, SWM, > spying on werewolves... > Betsy Hp: So? JKR tells a tight tale. James was involved in the Order and the fight against Voldemort, as is Harry. The point is, we learn something about Lupin. And Sirius. And Hagrid. And Arthur. But we don't learn all that much about McGonagall. What does she do for the Order again? Betsy Hp From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 06:35:04 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 06:35:04 -0000 Subject: Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164774 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Or maybe Karkaroff directs them to that table > because he was himself a Sytherin at one time zanooda: I also think that it's possible. When the Durmstrang delegation arrives, Karkaroff says:"Dear old Hogwarts...How good it is to be here, how good..."(p.247 US hardcover). Sounds to me very much like a former student returning to alma mater. > Carol wrote: > It's only Draco, after all, who tells us that the Dark Arts are > actually taught at Durmstrang zanooda: Sirius thinks so too. When he talks to Harry from the fire ("The Hungarian horntail") he says about Karkaroff:"And since he got out, from what I can tell, he's been teaching the Dark Arts to every student...". I don't know if it's the truth though, because Sirius was out of Azkaban only for a few months at this time, and I have no idea where he could hear about this. > Ronin wrote: > And Krum, who was a > dumb jock was now a charming gentleman asking Hermione to write him. zanooda: Hi, Ronin! This is really amazing how different readers can see the same character so differently! I never considered Krum to be "a dumb jock" . Are you sure you didn't confuse him with the movie Krum? From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 06:40:33 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 06:40:33 -0000 Subject: Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164775 > Carol responds: > > It's only Draco, after all, who tells us that the Dark Arts are > actually taught at Durmstrang Neri: Actually it's not only Draco. Hermione had it from a book, a sure sign of JKR supplying us with required WW background. ************************************************************ GoF, Ch. 11: "Durmstrang's another wizarding school?" said Harry. "Yes," said Hermione sniffily, "and it's got a horrible reputation. According to 'An Appraisal of Magical Education in Europe', it puts a lot of emphasis on the Dark Arts." ************************************************************* Neri From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 07:18:58 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:18:58 -0000 Subject: Father Figures (was: Wanted! Complex Adult Female...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164776 > Betsy Hp: > Right, Lupin is a person of interest, because JKR has made Lupin > interesting. Because she wants Harry (as well as the readers) > interested. So she gives Lupin interesting flaws while McGonagall > stays remote and perfect. zgirnius: I would be delighted to learn more about McG. She is interesting, and not remote and perfect. > Betsy Hp: > But McGonagall *doesn't* have those stories. Or at least she doesn't > share them with Harry. And Lupin is able to stop Harry from doing > whatever he was going to do to Sirius and listen to Lupin's story. zgirnius: I would not consider "Expelliarmus" a sign of a connection on a deep, emotional level. > Betsy Hp: > Well, yeah. But when Harry is in trouble or is troubled, he doesn't > seek out McGonagall. He turns to Lupin or Arthur or Sirius or even > Snape. zgirnius: Sorry to interrupt...Snape? When was this? I also can't recall Harry turning to Arthur for help, though that is less interesting. And (despite your feelings about it) by the conditions you are giving for impartant father figures, Dumbledore should be on the list. He both is a figure that can make Harry think, and one to whom he turns when he is emotionally troubled. However, I'm not arguing that there aren't some important father figures in the story, only that Lupin isn't one of them. BetsyHP: > There have been times that > Harry needs help or advice and either Dumbledore isn't reachable or > Harry's too intimidated to go to him. zgirnius: This happens with actual real-life fathers in good families. Dads go on business trips, are in important meetings, etc. As are moms. That Harry tries to find him is the big sign of an emotional connection. > Betsy Hp: > So? JKR tells a tight tale. James was involved in the Order and the > fight against Voldemort, as is Harry. The point is, we learn > something about Lupin. And Sirius. And Hagrid. And Arthur. But we > don't learn all that much about McGonagall. What does she do for the > Order again? zgirnius: Arthur is a liaison to the Ministry. Arthur also does guard duty in the Ministry. McG is DD's second in command at Hogwarts (not just as Deputy Headmistress, but for the Order as well). Neither of them tells Harry this. If you count learning stuff about James, we know how McG felt about James, Sirius, Lily, and poor little Peter. We also know she likes Quidditch. And thinks very highly of Hermione. And likes Hagrid. I felt she was a big presence in OotP. She even has flaws. She lectures Harry about not losing his temper with Umbridge, but in the end that is exactly what *she* does. Harry would have gone to her about the Sirius vision, had she been around. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Feb 9 14:01:02 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 14:01:02 -0000 Subject: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164778 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Stephanie: > It also appears that there are quite a few wizards in Little Whinging. > Do some of them have muggle jobs? > > Carol: > I'm not so sure that Vernon works in Little Whinging. Geoff: He doesn't. "As he drove towards town he thought of nothing else except a large order of drills he was hoping to get that day. But on the edge of town, drills were driven out of his mind by something else. As he sat in the usual morning traffic jam, he couldn't help noticing that there seemed to be a lot of strangely dressed people about." (PS "The Boy Who LIved" p.8 UK edition) From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Fri Feb 9 13:07:10 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 08:07:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) References: Message-ID: <001b01c74c4b$368ae940$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164779 --zanooda wrote-- >>>Hi, Ronin! This is really amazing how different readers can see the same character so differently! I never considered Krum to be "a dumb jock" . Are you sure you didn't confuse him with the movie Krum? <<< --Ronin-- I may well have confused him with the movie Krum. As I mentioned, my GOF book was ruined, but I've seen the movie recently and the movie is so different from the book. But, I do remember him in the book as being the celebrity jock, who even Hermione comments on his lack of wit. But at the end of the book I remember he tracked her down to say goodbye and ask her to write. He still stumbled over her name, but was making an effort. The celebrity Krum who first arrived at Hogwarts would've probably just said, "Well, see ya 'round then". Anyway, this is just my clouded observation. I'm sorry if I've gotten too mixed up between the movie and the book. I'll have to get a new copy of GOF and read it again. Cheers, Ronin From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Feb 9 15:05:53 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 10:05:53 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: The intellect of Krum Message-ID: <4191150.1171033554024.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164780 From: Ronin_47 > on his lack of wit. But at the end of the book I remember he > tracked her down to say goodbye and ask her to write. He still > stumbled over her name, but was making an effort. The celebrity > Krum who first arrived at Hogwarts would've probably just said, > "Well, see ya 'round then". Bart: Some names are very difficult to pronounce by someone who comes from another country. Even many English speakers would probably pronounce the name "her mine ee" rather than "her my-o knee". And remember, Krum was eligible for the Wizard's Cup. Bart From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 15:03:00 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:03:00 -0000 Subject: Father Figures In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0702082011q56311b3ejc9ce32c09d1a6a3c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164781 Debbie: > Lupin's avoidance of that role [father figure] is consistent with his overall portrayal. He is an example of a good person whose affliction and status as victim has affected him to the point of near paralysis. He has absorbed the WW's fear of werewolves and turned it into a form of self-loathing, so that *he* believes he is unsuited to teach at Hogwarts. Carol responds: Considering that he "forgot" to take his potion, endangered three students by transforming in their presence on a full-moon night, failed to tell Dumbledore how Sirius Black could get into the castle even after Black had slashed up the Fat Lady's painting and terrified Ron with a twelve-inch knife, and nearly committed murder in front of those same three students, I'd say his judgment is fairly sound in terms of his unsuitability to teach. (Or we could blame it all on the DADA Curse. :-) ) Debbie: I've wondered how hard Dumbledore had to cajole him to take the DADA position. I bet it was very hard. Carol: While I realize that DD *may* have chosen to hire Lupin for Harry's third year expressly because Lupin knew Sirius Black and could (theoretically) be helpful in catching him or protecting the students from him, we really don't know that it was DD's decision. It may have been coincidence, or Lupin may have come to Dumbledore because of the pending anti-werewolf legislation (which, IIRC, was passed while he was teaching, not as a result of his exposure as a werewolf). At any rate, we don't know who came to whom. As hard as it was for a werewolf to get (and keep) a job (hiring is one thing; all those absences at full moon are another), he was probably glad of the offer/opportunity. (And BTW, we know that DD placed an ad in the Daily Prophet after Lockhart was incapacitated; it's one of the things he mentions in the post-Basilisk interview with Harry. So probably that's how Lupin found out about the job, and DD, given both the Black situation and his policy of sheltering strays, not to mention that he actually knew something about Dark creatures, would have been happy to hire him.) Debbie: OTOH, I would not be surprised if he volunteered to go undercover with the other werewolves. He gets to punish himself in the guise of making himself useful. Carol: Well, he did make rather a mess of things, making possible Peter Pettigrew's escape and the Dark Lord's resurrection and all, so I can see why he might be beating himself up a bit, not for being a werewolf, which is not his fault, but for rushing out without his potion and all the subsequent events. If so, he's forgetting the one good thing his presence accomplished, giving Sirius Black a chance to tell his story without first murdering Scabbers and terrifying HRH, none of whom would have believed him without Lupin's commonsense suggesting of turning him into a man first and proving the truth of Black's seemingly preposterous story. Still, in light of what actually did happen (and possibly the death of Sirius Black after all Lupin went through to prove him innocent to HRH), I can see why he'd be unhappy with himself. If only he'd just explained everything to Dumbledore in the first place. DD would have talked to Black, found out about Scabbers, had Pettigrew arrested, and Voldie would still be vapor. > Debbie: > It's also worth pointing out that Lupin's errors are ones of omission. He *didn't* tell Dumbledore about the Marauder's activities. He tried to avoid telling Harry he knew James. And, of course, he didn't take his potion the night of the Shrieking Shack. Carol: He also didn't tell Dumbledore that Black was an Animagus who could easily get past the Dementors and onto the Hogwarts grounds, that he could be hiding in the Shrieking Shack, and that he knew more than one secret passage into the castle (even if only one is still unblocked and unknown to Filch). He also concealed the Marauder's Map, which Dumbledore doesn't learn about until the end of GoF. Debbie: Being a father-figure to Harry would be too dangerous for him, and it's much easier for him to do nothing. Carol: Makes him sound a bit like Peter Pettigrew, who is too lazy to kill Harry or take any action unless there's something in it for him, like saving his skin. I don't think Lupin fails to be a father figure to Harry because it's too dangerous. Too weak or too passive I'll buy. He's very secretive and doesn't like self-exposure, and he never talks to Harry about the past except in general terms, excusing James's behavior and so on. Maybe he's afraid to get close to Harry because talking about the past would reveal his own weaknesses. (I don't think Lupin sees James in him as Snape and Black do, but he could be afraid of emotional attachment for fear of losing him. Or he could just realize that it's inappropriate for a teacher to become emotionally attached to a student and that the Boy Who Lived should be treated like any other student as far as possible, anti-Dementor lessons excepted.) Debbie: This is one reason I can't buy Pippin's ESE!Lupin story; he's too passive a character to every make an affirmative decision to join the forces of evil. And storywise, he doesn't need to, as his passivity has caused plenty of trouble as it is. See -- I find his flaws very convincing as they are. He exemplifies the evil that ensues when good people do nothing. Carol: Here, I agree with you. But it's also interesting that he takes the lead in blaming Snape and finding reasons to think that he's evil after Harry presents his incomplete version of the events on the tower. So will Lupin take some sort of action, preferably related to Peter Pettigrew rather than Snape, in DH? Or will he make matters worse again by doing the wrong thing (or nothing)? It's too late for Lupin to be a father figure to Harry, but he can still help the Order fight the DEs, and he'd be a useful contact for DDM!Snape if he'd just put two and two together. Carol, hoping that Snape will save Tonks and by so doing persuade Lupin that they're on the same side (but, yeah, it's not their story, so it probably won't happen) From va32h at comcast.net Fri Feb 9 15:40:59 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:40:59 -0000 Subject: Lupin (was Re: Father Figures In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164782 Carol said: Considering that he "forgot" to take his potion, endangered three students by transforming in their presence on a full-moon night, failed to tell Dumbledore how Sirius Black could get into the castle even after Black had slashed up the Fat Lady's painting and terrified Ron with a twelve-inch knife, and nearly committed murder in front of those same three students, I'd say his judgment is fairly sound in terms of his unsuitability to teach. (Or we could blame it all on the DADA Curse. :-) ) va32h here: Self-fulfilling prophecy at work? We know how much Jo loves those! Lupin is so convinced of his own inadequacy that he subsconsciously does, or allows to happen, just the sort of things that would call his judgement into question and bring about his dismissal. ***on a side note, Lupin's werewolfism has been called a metaphor for everything under the sun, I know, but if we can liken it to say - schizophrenia or manic-depression, people with those conditions will sometimes choose to go off their meds because while they are better behaved when medicated, they feel stifled and deadened. Carol here: Well, he did make rather a mess of things, making possible Peter Pettigrew's escape and the Dark Lord's resurrection and all, so I can see why he might be beating himself up a bit, not for being a werewolf, which is not his fault, but for rushing out without his potion and all the subsequent events. If so, he's forgetting the one good thing his presence accomplished, giving Sirius Black a chance to tell his story without first murdering Scabbers and terrifying HRH, none of whom would have believed him without Lupin's commonsense suggesting of turning him into a man first and proving the truth of Black's seemingly preposterous story. Still, in light of what actually did happen (and possibly the death of Sirius Black after all Lupin went through to prove him innocent to HRH), I can see why he'd be unhappy with himself. If only he'd just explained everything to Dumbledore in the first place. DD would have talked to Black, found out about Scabbers, had Pettigrew arrested, and Voldie would still be vapor. va32h here: Harry has these exact same feelings - he's made everything worse. But Dumbledore tells him that the consequences of our actions are so unpredictable and divers that it is impossible to predict them, and even more pointless to dwell on them or blame ourselves. Harry and Lupin both had a hand in setting Pettigrew free, but it was Pettigrew who made the choice to go and seek out Voldemort, to give him aid. Pettigrew who continued to make the choice to aid Voldemort when he could have allowed Vapormort to languish forever. Sounds like Dumbledore should have given Lupin this pep talk as well as Harry. And perhaps he did. Lupin strikes me as someone who is determined to be a bit of a martyr, and there really is no reasoning with people like that. Carol here: Makes him sound a bit like Peter Pettigrew, who is too lazy to kill Harry or take any action unless there's something in it for him, like saving his skin. I don't think Lupin fails to be a father figure to Harry because it's too dangerous. Too weak or too passive I'll buy. He's very secretive and doesn't like self-exposure, and he never talks to Harry about the past except in general terms, excusing James's behavior and so on. Maybe he's afraid to get close to Harry because talking about the past would reveal his own weaknesses. (I don't think Lupin sees James in him as Snape and Black do, but he could be afraid of emotional attachment for fear of losing him. Or he could just realize that it's inappropriate for a teacher to become emotionally attached to a student and that the Boy Who Lived should be treated like any other student as far as possible, anti-Dementor lessons excepted.) va32h here: But Harry has not been Lupin's student for over two years by the time of HBP, so I don't think the "inappropriate relationship" is a valid excuse, if that is Lupin's excuse. Carol here: Here, I agree with you. But it's also interesting that he takes the lead in blaming Snape and finding reasons to think that he's evil after Harry presents his incomplete version of the events on the tower. va32h here: Yes, that bothered me - how does one go to "I trust Dumbledore completely therefore I trust Snape" to "Dumbledore was fooled all along and Snape is evil" so quickly, and on the word of Harry, who they all know is prone to snap judgements. But that is one scene in which I think nearly everyone is behaving out of character, so don't even get me started on that! va32h From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 15:48:26 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:48:26 -0000 Subject: Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164783 Carol earlier: > > It's only Draco, after all, who tells us that the Dark Arts are actually taught at Durmstrang > Neri responded: > Actually it's not only Draco. Hermione had it from a book, a sure sign of JKR supplying us with required WW background. > GoF, Ch. 11: > > "Durmstrang's another wizarding school?" said Harry. > > "Yes," said Hermione sniffily, "and it's got a horrible reputation. > According to 'An Appraisal of Magical Education in Europe', it puts a lot of emphasis on the Dark Arts." Carol again: Yes, I saw that quote after I'd written my post (which goes to show that I should check canon rather than quoting from memory, but I don't always have time). But what exactly does "put[ting] a lot of emphasis on the Dark Arts" mean? Hermione doesn't say that the students are taught to perform Unforgiveable Curses (or Dark magic in general, since the Unforgiveables haven't yet been introduced). Surely, the Durmstrang students don't Crucio each other or their teachers, much less AK them. (Maybe young DEs like Barty Jr., who *do* learn the Unforgiveables, practice on animals?) Maybe, unlike Hogwarts students (when Barty isn't teaching them), Durmstrang students actually learn what the Dark Arts *are.* But that doesn't mean that Krum has ever actually performed a Crucio before, nor does it account for his evident shame at the end-of-year banquet: "Krum, Harry saw, looked wary, almost frightened, as though he expected Dumbledore to say something harsh" (723). His Crucio was the result of an Imperius Curse performed by Barty Crouch Jr., the man who demonstrated the three Unforgiveable Curses to fourth-years, in essence teaching the the Dark Arts at Hogwarts, or at least "putting a lot of emphasis" on them. Perhaps Durmstrang uses similar teaching methods? (Surely, the Unforgiveables are Unforgiveable in all of the WW, not just Britain?) BTW, with the possible exception of Antonin Dolohov, the DEs we know about, including Karkaroff (see upthread), seem to be products of Hogwarts, not Durmstrang. (It's *very* odd that Barty Sr., a product of Hogwarts, would state so emphatically that he hates the Dark Arts and anyone who ractices them yet authorize his own aurors to use the Unforgiveables and use the Imperius Curse himself on his own son. What's up with that?) Carol, who still doesn't think that Krum could or would have performed a Crucio had he not been Imperiused by Barty Jr. (who got twelve OWLs at Hogwarts) From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Feb 9 16:19:23 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 16:19:23 -0000 Subject: Krum's Intellect/Father Figures(Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164784 > > Ronin wrote: > > > And Krum, who was a > > dumb jock was now a charming gentleman asking Hermione to write him. > > zanooda: > > Hi, Ronin! This is really amazing how different readers can see the > same character so differently! I never considered Krum to be "a dumb > jock" . Are you sure you didn't confuse him with the movie Krum? Magpie: I don't know how I missed this the first time--I agree with zanooda. Krum is never a dumb jock or not charming. He has an accent and he's a bit awkward, but he's never stupid or a jock. Nor is he any more of a gentleman at the end of the year than he was at the beginning, that I remember. He was always the way he is (and never wavered from his fixation on Hermione). I don't remember Hermione saying anything about his lack of wit. Also, he's never a 'celebrity Krum' who would have said "See you around, then." He's trying to get her to visit him in Bulgaria after the Second Task. I don't think this has to do with manners, exactly, though. Krum's not interested in his fangirls and he really likes Hermione and is jealous of her attentions to Harry. (His trouble with her name isn't really fair--there's no reason he should mispronounce her name that way. I always thought it was JKR's clever way of giving the pronounciation to the many readers who were apparently unfamiliar with it and mispronounced it as they read.) > Betsy Hp: > But McGonagall *doesn't* have those stories. Or at least she doesn't > share them with Harry. And Lupin is able to stop Harry from doing > whatever he was going to do to Sirius and listen to Lupin's story. zgirnius: I would not consider "Expelliarmus" a sign of a connection on a deep, emotional level. > Betsy Hp: > Well, yeah. But when Harry is in trouble or is troubled, he doesn't > seek out McGonagall. He turns to Lupin or Arthur or Sirius or even > Snape. zgirnius: Sorry to interrupt...Snape? When was this? I also can't recall Harry turning to Arthur for help, though that is less interesting. And (despite your feelings about it) by the conditions you are giving for impartant father figures, Dumbledore should be on the list. He both is a figure that can make Harry think, and one to whom he turns when he is emotionally troubled. However, I'm not arguing that there aren't some important father figures in the story, only that Lupin isn't one of them. Magpie: I agree that Lupin's never much of a father figure, but (and correct me if I'm wrong and you're not doing this) it still seems like you're trying to try to put McGonagall on Lupin's level in terms of importance to the story or to Harry. The information McGongall has about James is on the level of the information Slughorn gives us about Lily (though even Slughorn is more central to the story). She was a favorite student, not someone she really knew about as a peer. Lupin, unlike McGonagall, is down there in the midst of the story. He has 2- way emotional relationships with James, Sirius, Peter and Snape, connections that drive important events in the story. He knew James and Lily as another student. He's a Marauder, and the Marauders are central to the plot. It sounds--and as I said, I might just be mistaken--like you're trying to argue that McGonagall and Lupin are really about equal in importance (both plotwise and emotionally to Harry) in the story and that just seems obviously not true. I would agree she isn't perfect-- like most of Rowling's characters her "type" is connected very much to her flaws. But Harry's relationship with Lupin is far more personal than the relationship he has to McGonagall. She's a teacher. Lupin is Moony. -m From dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 15:47:03 2007 From: dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com (dragonkeeper) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 07:47:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The intellect of Krum In-Reply-To: <4191150.1171033554024.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <340049.96052.qm@web53308.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164785 Viktor comes from a region where the hard sounding vowels are used more, like K, V, T and J sounds. Hermonie would be a difficult name for him to pronounce. Remember, he also had a little trouble saying Harry also. I don't think that Viktor is stupid. I feel he is quite powerful in his right and knows about the dark arts but not much on defending against them. Dargonkeeper From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Fri Feb 9 16:42:18 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 08:42:18 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702090842qc5583b7ydd2d1dafc4dfc79@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164786 > Stephanie: > > And the most important, What was in the LETTER??? > > > Carol: > *That* much we'll find out. JKR has said of Petunia (as of Snape) that > there's more to her than meets the eye even though she's neither a > witch nor a Squib and is not the person who'll perform magic "late in > life" in the last book. (I'm betting that's Mrs. Figg.) But I think > that Petunia will finally let her repressed affection or concern for > Harry show itself, that she'll share Dumbledore's letter(s) with him > (in gratitude for his saving Dudley's life???), and that she'll tell > Harry what she remembers about her sister and "that awful boy." When > Vernon is safely at work or in the hospital, of course. > > Carol, just having fun here and not committed to any of these ideas > except Figgy as the one who does magic late in life > Kristy: I kind of have a theory about Petunia being "more than meets the eye". I think Lily and Petunia's parents were both squibs, which is why they would be so excited about having a witch in the family and also why Petunia knows more about the wizard world than a normal muggle would (even one with a witch for a sister.) Oh, and my guess on the person performing magic late in life was Filch (Mrs. Figg was my second guess though.) ========================================== Jeremiah: I guessed Filch, too, at first when JKR mentioned it. But I thought JKR said he's not the one. I love Arabella Figg and her purse full of cat food. Ahhhh... Ok. She gets my vote. (and I can't wait to see who will play her in the movie). To address the chapter: Vernon does not work in Little Whinging, as expresed in another post. All we know about the town/village/ what-have-you is that the Dursleys live there, Harry lives there (over the summer) Mrs. Figg lives there and there's a park with a swing set. (that's the general stuff) not much else. As far as the letter: I would assume a few things that DD would have written. 1)He would have told Petunia that her sister died and 2) He would have told her that she needs to take Harry in so he can be safe. I do, however, think (and this is where I jump into the world of speculation) DD would have talked about LV's attack. This is my guess because I feel that Petunia, knowing more than she lets on, would have known that her sister went into hiding, was all caught up in the Order and I base this on her saying in "The Keeper of the Keys" (I hope that's the right chapter in PS/SS when Hagrid arrives) that her sister "got herself blown up" because of James. Whatever else is anyone's guess. Jeremiah: Who's sure this has been talked aobut before but likes to discuss it, any way. :) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 17:08:42 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:08:42 -0000 Subject: Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164787 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol: Still, in light of what actually did happen (and possibly the death of Sirius Black after all Lupin went through to prove him innocent to HRH), I can see why [Lupin would] be unhappy with himself. If only he'd just explained everything to Dumbledore in the first place. DD would have talked to Black, found out about Scabbers, had Pettigrew arrested, and Voldie would still be vapor. Annemehr: Well okay, but *if* DD would have wanted to *prevent* LV regaining a physical body, by preventing Pettigrew's escape, then why isn't LV a vapor *now,* when he so easily could be? "'You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?' called Voldemort, his scarlet eyes narrowed over the top of the shield. 'Above such brutality, are you?'" [OoP ch. 36, US p. 814] (Well, actually, no he isn't. Dumbledore cannot be too noble to *kill* the likes of LV, if he is not too noble to charge a 16-year-old boy with the task. [HBP ch. 23, US pp. 510-512]) Anyway, we know that at the time of that duel in the Ministry, Dumbledore was already aware that LV had at least one Horcrux to tie LV's soul to Earth. Harry had told him what LV had said in the graveyard, that LV had gone "further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality." DD told Harry in HBP that his conclusion was that LV had made Horcruxes, in the plural -- and indeed that he had suspected such a thing ever since Harry had shown him Riddle's destroyed diary. [HBP ch. 23, US pp. 501-502] So, DD is not too noble to kill the likes of Voldemort. And, DD was at least pretty certain that if he had tried to kill LV in that MoM duel, he would merely have returned him to the vapor state. Everything could have returned to pre-GoF conditions, except for Sirius's death. Yet, DD did not do it. Why wouldn't DD do it? The inescapable conclusion is that DD *wants* LV to have a body these days. It *has* to be part of the Plan -- that Plan that we *still* don't know, and which inevitably entails the cost of the many collateral deaths we read about in HBP. And, given that, it's also reasonable to conclude that Pettigrew was supposed to escape. Annemehr, saying, it's Guilty!DD, I'm telling you... From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 17:18:07 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:18:07 -0000 Subject: The intellect of Krum In-Reply-To: <4191150.1171033554024.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164788 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > From: Ronin_47 > > on his lack of wit. But at the end of the book I remember he > > tracked her down to say goodbye and ask her to write. He still > > stumbled over her name, but was making an effort. The celebrity > > Krum who first arrived at Hogwarts would've probably just said, > > "Well, see ya 'round then". > > Bart: > Some names are very difficult to pronounce by someone who comes from another country. Even many English speakers would probably pronounce the name "her mine ee" rather than "her my-o knee". And remember, Krum was eligible for the Wizard's Cup. > zgirnius: Indeed, I was unaware that the name is Greek in origin, so I always read it "Hermy-own", since in English phonetics, single e's at the end of words are usually silent. I only learned the correct pronunciation when I saw a movie. (Born and raised in the US). From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 17:30:20 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:30:20 -0000 Subject: Krum's Intellect/Father Figures(Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164789 > Magpie: > It sounds--and as I said, I might just be mistaken--like you're trying > to argue that McGonagall and Lupin are really about equal in > importance (both plotwise and emotionally to Harry) in the story and > that just seems obviously not true. I would agree she isn't perfect-- > like most of Rowling's characters her "type" is connected very much to > her flaws. But Harry's relationship with Lupin is far more personal > than the relationship he has to McGonagall. She's a teacher. Lupin is > Moony. zgirnius: I disagree. When has Harry ever called, or thought of, Lupin as 'Moony'? I would agree that Lupin has more importance to the story than McG because of the emotional conection he has to James (and Lily?), who are a part of the story, true, but not to Harry. From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Feb 9 17:35:27 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:35:27 -0000 Subject: Lupin's passivity was Re: Father Figures In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164790 > > Debbie: > This is one reason I can't buy Pippin's ESE!Lupin story; he's too > passive a character to every make an affirmative decision to join the > forces of evil. And storywise, he doesn't need to, as his passivity > has caused plenty of trouble as it is. See -- I find his flaws very > convincing as they are. He exemplifies the evil that ensues when good > people do nothing. > > Carol: > Here, I agree with you. But it's also interesting that he takes the > lead in blaming Snape and finding reasons to think that he's evil > after Harry presents his incomplete version of the events on the > tower. Pippin: Lupin was a member of the original Order of the Phoenix. That is hardly an example of a good person doing nothing. There are many other examples in canon where Lupin takes the initiative, especially in the Shrieking Shack and in his conversations in OOP. And of course he claimed to have led his friends to become animagi. I'm wary of explanations that are emotionally satisfying but are incompatible with the character's pattern of behavior, and Lupin's supposed passivity is one of them. If Lupin has internalized the view of the WW that werewolves are inherently evil, and is attempting to counter it by appearing to be passive and harmless, that is not really a passive action. But if he did indeed internalize that view, then he wouldn't need to "join the forces of evil." He would think he had joined them already. And that is the way Voldemort works. He doesn't bang on your door and invite you to join the forces of evil. He joins *you*. Pippin From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Feb 9 17:47:18 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:47:18 -0000 Subject: Krum's Intellect/Father Figures(Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164791 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zgirnius" wrote: > > > > Magpie: > > It sounds--and as I said, I might just be mistaken--like you're > trying > > to argue that McGonagall and Lupin are really about equal in > > importance (both plotwise and emotionally to Harry) in the story and > > that just seems obviously not true. I would agree she isn't perfect-- > > like most of Rowling's characters her "type" is connected very much > to > > her flaws. But Harry's relationship with Lupin is far more personal > > than the relationship he has to McGonagall. She's a teacher. Lupin is > > Moony. > > zgirnius: > I disagree. When has Harry ever called, or thought of, Lupin > as 'Moony'? I would agree that Lupin has more importance to the story > than McG because of the emotional conection he has to James (and > Lily?), who are a part of the story, true, but not to Harry. Magpie: My point wasn't that Harry thought of him as Moony. I used Moony because that's his Marauder name, and so was shorthand for his importance to the whole history of Harry's family. His emotional connection to James and Lily gives him more emotional connection to Harry--certainly more than McGonagall. Harry knows a lot more about Lupin's emotional life and mistakes etc. than he does with McGonagall--and so do we. zgirnius: Indeed, I was unaware that the name is Greek in origin, so I always read it "Hermy-own", since in English phonetics, single e's at the end of words are usually silent. I only learned the correct pronunciation when I saw a movie. (Born and raised in the US). Magpie: But that's because you were unfamiliar with the name and reading it in a book so making up your own pronounciation. Once you heard how to say it in the movie you had no trouble pronouncing it, presumably. Krum's changing it to "Her-mo-ninny" every time she said it was silly--and I think the point of it was so that Hermione could, in canon, say her name phoenetically for all those readers who had never heard the name before and were pronouncing it wrong. I don't think there's anything in the name that would make it particularly difficult for a Bulgarian to pronounce, even if his accent was still audible when he said her name. (Though Krum's accept isn't correct for Bulgarian anyway. I think what he's got is your basic B-movie vampire accent.) -m From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 17:54:15 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:54:15 -0000 Subject: Lupin (was Re: Father Figures In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164792 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > Carol here: > Here, I agree with you. But it's also interesting that he takes the > lead in blaming Snape and finding reasons to think that he's evil > after Harry presents his incomplete version of the events on the > tower. > > va32h here: > > Yes, that bothered me - how does one go to "I trust Dumbledore > completely therefore I trust Snape" to "Dumbledore was fooled all > along and Snape is evil" so quickly, and on the word of Harry, who > they all know is prone to snap judgements. > > va32h > Annemehr: For DDM!Snape adherents, there can be a simple explanation: Lupin is the Order member who had been given some inkling of what was to happen that night. Judging by his reactions, I would guess he did not know that Dumbledore was to die; that seems to have truly shocked him. But he may have been forewarned that Snape was about to do something, at DD's behest, that would appear absolutely traitorous. Lupin's harsh words about Snape come after everyone in the hospital wing had listened to Fawkes's song for a while. Perhaps the Phoenix song gave him the time and the courage to gather himself and play his part as he knew he must: to bolster everyone's conviction that Snape is a true DE. It would make sense. It would give DDM!Snape a contact, and a particularly safe one with regard to fooling LV, because Lupin is running with the werewolves these days, and we know the werewolves and the DEs can be buddies. Annemehr From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Feb 9 18:00:08 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:00:08 -0000 Subject: Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: <001b01c74c4b$368ae940$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164793 > --Ronin-- > I may well have confused him with the movie Krum. As I mentioned, my GOF book was ruined, but I've seen the movie recently and the movie is so different from the book. But, I do remember him in the book as being the celebrity jock, who even Hermione comments on his lack of wit. But at the end of the book I remember he tracked her down to say goodbye and ask her to write. He still stumbled over her name, but was making an effort. The celebrity Krum who first arrived at Hogwarts would've probably just said, "Well, see ya 'round then". > Anyway, this is just my clouded observation. I'm sorry if I've gotten too mixed up between the movie and the book. I'll have to get a new copy of GOF and read it again. > > Cheers, > Ronin > Hickengruendler: Krum may have been a celibrity, but he never particularly enjoyed this status. (Which I think is a contrast to his portrayal in the movie). I think that's one of the reasons, why he got interested in Hermione, because she was not gazed by his fame. I also never saw him as a *dumb jock* type, as it is called here. Not knowing how to spell Hermione's name doesn't say anything about his intellect, given that he's a foreigner and it's not a particularly easy name. Viktor Krum, at the very least, is intelligent enough not to listen to Karkaroff's prejudies about muggleborns (despite of the fact, that him being a Durmstrang student, he probably got told that Muggles and Muggleborns are inferior ever since he was about 12). He has read Rita Skeeter's articles and from those he knew that Hermione was muggleborn. Despite of this, he still asked her to the Yule Ball. He may be a bit grumpy, but I never saw him as someone, who enjoys his star status. Quite in contrast, he seems to be a very *shy* person, as demonstrated by how long it took him to invite Hermione to the Yule Ball. (He first watched her from a far in the library several times). From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Fri Feb 9 17:22:23 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 12:22:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The intellect of Krum References: <4191150.1171033554024.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <002101c74c6e$dfd525b0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164794 --Bart wrote-- >>>Some names are very difficult to pronounce by someone who comes from another country. Even many English speakers would probably pronounce the name "her mine ee" rather than "her my-o knee". And remember, Krum was eligible for the Wizard's Cup. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- It's true that some names are difficult to pronounce in many languages. I know that many fans were pronouncing Hermione as Hermee - One, before the movies were released. Krum's stumbling over her name is just a small bit of evidence though. Considering that he was at Hogwarts and speaking with her for nearly an entire school year, I'd have expected any fairly bright person to be able to pronounce her name by the summer holiday. Hermione's name aside, she comments that he's not the brightest boy at some point. Unfortunately, I can not recite the exact quote because I don't have my copy of the book. I also believe that someone (Moody, I think) calls him a dolt at one point and says he would never make it through the tournament without Karkarof's coaching. Again, I apologize if I'm getting the movie mixed up with the book, but I am 99% certain that Hermione mentions his lack of intelligence (not necessarily the word she uses) at some point in the book. They really have nothing in common and he just watches her read.... I know that Ron has many observations about Victor's short comings, but they are likely out of jealousy. Personally, I don't think Victor was stupid or that his intelligence would be a reflection on the entire school. He is probably a very talented wizard and pairing that with his physical abilities would've been thought to give him an advantage in the tournament. Just because he is not book-smart or the best communicator doesn't make him stupid. He could still be a useful ally or a worthy foe. He may have been so taken aback by Hermione's beauty, that he was unable to speak properly around her.....Like Harry with Cho. It could be argued either way. I just felt that Durmstrang was stereotypically, more brawn than brains while Beaubatons was stereotypically the opposite, demonstrating refinement and charm. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Feb 9 18:06:17 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 13:06:17 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) Message-ID: <17247637.1171044377611.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164795 From: Annemehr >The inescapable conclusion is that DD *wants* LV to have a body these >days. It *has* to be part of the Plan -- that Plan that we *still* >don't know, and which inevitably entails the cost of the many >collateral deaths we read about in HBP. Bart: (Agreeing) With the horcruxes, Dumbledore could not have killed Voldemort. Therefore, there must be a key vulnerability in this particular body of which Dumbledore wishes to take advantage. Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Feb 9 18:09:23 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 13:09:23 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The intellect of Krum Message-ID: <5953571.1171044563204.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164796 zgirnius: >Indeed, I was unaware that the name is Greek in origin, so I always >read it "Hermy-own", since in English phonetics, single e's at the >end of words are usually silent. I only learned the correct >pronunciation when I saw a movie. (Born and raised in the US). An actress with that name was an old friend of my family (and frequent houseguest of my uncle's, when she was at the U.S.), so I grew up familiar with the name (years before I learned how it was spelled, assuming I ever did...) Bart From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Feb 9 18:07:36 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:07:36 -0000 Subject: Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164797 > > Annemehr: > Well okay, but *if* DD would have wanted to *prevent* LV regaining a > physical body, by preventing Pettigrew's escape, then why isn't LV a > vapor *now,* when he so easily could be? > > "'You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?' called Voldemort, his > scarlet eyes narrowed over the top of the shield. 'Above such > brutality, are you?'" [OoP ch. 36, US p. 814] > > (Well, actually, no he isn't. Dumbledore cannot be too noble to *kill* > the likes of LV, if he is not too noble to charge a 16-year-old boy > with the task. [HBP ch. 23, US pp. 510-512]) > Pippin: Actually, he might be. Harry is only charged with taking one life. The rebounding AK which struck Voldemort and failed to kill him destroyed an entire house. An AK rebounding from Voldemort would doubtless have killed Dumbledore and could have collapsed the entrance hall, killing Harry and Bella, and maybe the Order members and the captured DE's trapped below as well. That's a lot of lives to sacrifice for what might only be a temporary respite. There is no guarantee that Voldemort would remain disembodied for as long as he did before. Pippin From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 18:12:23 2007 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:12:23 -0000 Subject: Positions in Book 7 Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164798 Carol: > DADA? Why not put the real Mad-Eye back in the position he was hired > for three years earlier? The kids need his protection even more than > they did then, and there's no danger of an imposter this time around. > That would save JKR the trouble of introducing a new character, too. Finwitch: It would -- though Kingsley would do well, too. But, of course, Moody being retired, he has the time to teach. Any old, retired Auror would as well, but let's keep Moody. During Harry's OWL-years, the new person introduced was the DADA-professor. This apparently changed, when Snape was moved to the DADA-position and Slughorn was the new one in Potions! Transfiguration-teacher... That's the new one, now, I'd say. It could be Tonks or a new character. Possibly one of the *registered* animagi. Anyway -- where will Aberforth fit in? Is he going to stay in the bar and Harry goes there, get a teaching job, is he needed to 'wake' Albus' portrait or something? Finwitch From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Fri Feb 9 18:15:59 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 10:15:59 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702091015r3105f584rbaf94f1783af1f3e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164799 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com , "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol: Still, in light of what actually did happen (and possibly the death of Sirius Black after all Lupin went through to prove him innocent to HRH), I can see why [Lupin would] be unhappy with himself. If only he'd just explained everything to Dumbledore in the first place. DD would have talked to Black, found out about Scabbers, had Pettigrew arrested, and Voldie would still be vapor. Annemehr: Well okay, but *if* DD would have wanted to *prevent* LV regaining a physical body, by preventing Pettigrew's escape, then why isn't LV a vapor *now,* when he so easily could be? "'You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?' called Voldemort, his scarlet eyes narrowed over the top of the shield. 'Above such brutality, are you?'" [OoP ch. 36, US p. 814] (Well, actually, no he isn't. Dumbledore cannot be too noble to *kill* the likes of LV, if he is not too noble to charge a 16-year-old boy with the task. [HBP ch. 23, US pp. 510-512]) Anyway, we know that at the time of that duel in the Ministry, Dumbledore was already aware that LV had at least one Horcrux to tie LV's soul to Earth. Harry had told him what LV had said in the graveyard, that LV had gone "further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality." DD told Harry in HBP that his conclusion was that LV had made Horcruxes, in the plural -- and indeed that he had suspected such a thing ever since Harry had shown him Riddle's destroyed diary. [HBP ch. 23, US pp. 501-502] So, DD is not too noble to kill the likes of Voldemort. And, DD was at least pretty certain that if he had tried to kill LV in that MoM duel, he would merely have returned him to the vapor state. Everything could have returned to pre-GoF conditions, except for Sirius's death. Yet, DD did not do it. Why wouldn't DD do it? The inescapable conclusion is that DD *wants* LV to have a body these days. It *has* to be part of the Plan -- that Plan that we *still* don't know, and which inevitably entails the cost of the many collateral deaths we read about in HBP. And, given that, it's also reasonable to conclude that Pettigrew was supposed to escape. Annemehr, saying, it's Guilty!DD, I'm telling you... =================================== Jeremiah: Woah! That's a lot of blame. Ok, First: LV asks "Above such brutality" and we know, for a fact, according to the Wizard Cards that DD has killed/destroyed before. Teh Dark Wizard Grindlewald. HOWEVER... at the MoM DD knew of the prophecy and, therefore, knew he "should" not be theo one (my emphasis on should) and that Harry needs to be the one who does the "Killing of the Riddle." Second, if LV has more Horcruxes then reducing LV to vapor would only lead to LV coming back again... and again.. and again... and (how many of them are there?) yeah. So, Dd wasn't being Guilty!Dumbledore as much as WayTooSmartToScrewItUp!Dumbledore. Also, DD never "charged" Harry with the task LV did. LV could "choose" Neville and the books would have been called Neville Longbottm and the Sorcerer's Stone and we'd have some freaky-geeky Harry Potter with a Rememberall... And this group would be NLforGrownups. I think Annemeher is operating under the assumption tht Dumbledore knows every single thing that happens in the entire WW. We are only told by Ron (in his infinite wisdom...re: sacrasm here) something along the lines of "I think he [Dumbledore] *pretty much* knows everything that goes on around here" and that's only "pretty much" and the refernce is only on Hogwarts. Inescapable conclusion, huh? Yeah. LV does need to have a body so he can die. he also needs to be knocked down to one soul. And, yes. pettigrew needed to escape, but I fail to see any real evidence that DD "made" any of that happen. Way too much blame, IMO. And, Why wouldn't DD "do it?" Well, given the evidence in cannon... would you? DD knows better than to just go in, all 150+ years of him, and act the Rambo-wannabe, flaining wands and incantating (or whatever it is a wizard does) with a "gonna-get-the-bad-guy" attitude. It's skill, cunning, patience and stealth that wins this game. Just like Wizard Chess. And IMO that's why the game was brought up so early in the series. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Fri Feb 9 18:27:49 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 10:27:49 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Positions in Book 7 Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702091027x208f9f4cne8c3ff3f482eb987@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164800 Carol: > DADA? Why not put the real Mad-Eye back in the position he was hired > for three years earlier? The kids need his protection even more than > they did then, and there's no danger of an imposter this time around. > That would save JKR the trouble of introducing a new character, too. Finwitch: It would -- though Kingsley would do well, too. But, of course, Moody being retired, he has the time to teach. Any old, retired Auror would as well, but let's keep Moody. During Harry's OWL-years, the new person introduced was the DADA-professor. This apparently changed, when Snape was moved to the DADA-position and Slughorn was the new one in Potions! Transfiguration-teacher... That's the new one, now, I'd say. It could be Tonks or a new character. Possibly one of the *registered* animagi. Anyway -- where will Aberforth fit in? Is he going to stay in the bar and Harry goes there, get a teaching job, is he needed to 'wake' Albus' portrait or something? Finwitch ===================== Jeremiah: Oooohhhh... Never thought about Aberforth having a portrait of his brother. So, harry would have to go to the Hogs Head to see Aberforth and chat with DD's portrait. Hmmm... I'm sure, as someone posted a few weeks ago, that Aberforth has had a keen little business keeping Hogwarts stocked with bezoars and that might be a nice thing for Harry to have around, seeing as they are "rare." Plus, dies anyone else think that Aberforth would be kind enough so supply harry and his plas with a free butterbeer from time to time? Naw, me neither. I see Professor Sinestra stepping up as next in line for Head Mistress (I'm sure there's something ver scientific in minerva and sinestra's Friendship) or, perhaps Prof Vector? Yeah, Moody would be cool as the new DADA prof but I'd like Kinglsey, too. but Tonks as transfiguation? Her skills are from birth. She can't really teach that, can she? And she said she didnt' do well in most other catagories to become an Auror so I'd assume she's not really up for the professor role. However, Slughorn was good at transifuring himself into a chair. That would be a great trick to pull as a transfiguration teacher. And he did stand in as the Slytherin HoH... maybe he'll stay on, since Hogwarts is still prety well protected. Plus, he's got all his stuff there. How do we all feel about a House Elf revolution? That would be fun, huh? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 18:34:08 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:34:08 -0000 Subject: Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164801 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > > > > Annemehr: > > Well okay, but *if* DD would have wanted to *prevent* LV regaining a > > physical body, by preventing Pettigrew's escape, then why isn't LV a > > vapor *now,* when he so easily could be? > > > > "'You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?' called Voldemort, his > > scarlet eyes narrowed over the top of the shield. 'Above such > > brutality, are you?'" [OoP ch. 36, US p. 814] > > > > (Well, actually, no he isn't. Dumbledore cannot be too noble to *kill* > > the likes of LV, if he is not too noble to charge a 16-year-old boy > > with the task. [HBP ch. 23, US pp. 510-512]) > > > > Pippin: > Actually, he might be. Harry is only charged with taking one life. > The rebounding AK which struck Voldemort and failed to kill > him destroyed an entire house. An AK rebounding from Voldemort > would doubtless have killed Dumbledore and could have collapsed > the entrance hall, killing Harry and Bella, and maybe the Order > members and the captured DE's trapped below as well. That's > a lot of lives to sacrifice for what might only be a temporary respite. > There is no guarantee that Voldemort would remain > disembodied for as long as he did before. Annemehr: Why would an AK rebound from Voldemort? As far as I know, it would hit Voldemort and destroy his body; the only difference from usual being that his (piece of) soul would remain bound to Earth. I always thought it was the more unusual event of the AK rebounding from baby Harry that destroyed the house. But in any case, if we are counting deaths, then by leaving LV in his body, DD is responsible for the deaths of the people on the collapsed bridge, maybe some in the "hurricane," Madam Bones, Emmeline Vance, and Hannah Abbot's mother. "Anyone we know dead?" Ron would ask Hermione, every time she opened the Daily Prophet. [HBP ch. 11, 221 US] And, if there were blowback involved in AKing Voldemort, I'm sure DD would not have been taken by surprise as LV was at Godric's Hollow. Annemehr From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Fri Feb 9 18:39:22 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) References: Message-ID: <006e01c74c79$a0756370$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164802 --Pippin wrote-- >>>Actually, he might be. Harry is only charged with taking one life. The rebounding AK which struck Voldemort and failed to kill him destroyed an entire house. An AK rebounding from Voldemort would doubtless have killed Dumbledore and could have collapsed the entrance hall, killing Harry and Bella, and maybe the Order members and the captured DE's trapped below as well. That's a lot of lives to sacrifice for what might only be a temporary respite. There is no guarantee that Voldemort would remain disembodied for as long as he did before. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- This is a good observation. Who knows how many lives would've been lost, only to have Lord Voldemort return again at a later time. Dumbledore was the only one who knew the entire prophecy. He knew that he could not kill The Dark Lord, but that only Harry could and Harry was not ready. It's probably a lot easier to destroy the horcruxes, rather than several, angry incarnations of a living, breething, AK casting Lord Voldemort. So by waiting, he only needs to be killed once. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Fri Feb 9 18:49:52 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 13:49:52 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Positions in Book 7 Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think) References: Message-ID: <007701c74c7b$1626d300$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164803 --Finwitch wrote-- >>>It would -- though Kingsley would do well, too. But, of course, Moody being retired, he has the time to teach. Any old, retired Auror would as well, but let's keep Moody. During Harry's OWL-years, the new person introduced was the DADA-professor. This apparently changed, when Snape was moved to the DADA-position and Slughorn was the new one in Potions! Transfiguration-teacher... That's the new one, now, I'd say. It could be Tonks or a new character. Possibly one of the *registered* animagi. Anyway -- where will Aberforth fit in? Is he going to stay in the bar and Harry goes there, get a teaching job, is he needed to 'wake' Albus' portrait or something?<<< --Ronin's Comments-- I agree that Moody being retired and having experience in the field would be a good choice. But personally, I'm not impressed by Moody. He's supposed to be this legendary auror and can see through the back of his head, yet he was overtaken by Barty jr. and was the first to fall at the MoM. Teaching may be perfect for him because he has the experience and knowledge, but seems a bit too old or out of step to be in the mix when it comes to acting now. Combining his knowledge with the strong protections already placed on the school, he would be a great choice for DADA. I don't see that transfiguration has to be re-assigned. McGonagall could still teach it, just as Umbridge kept her teaching position when she assumed the role of Headmistress and High Inquisitor. If Umbridge could do it, certainly, Minerva McGonagall could do it and be much more effective. The head of Gryffindor House would probably need to be re-assigned though, so that it didn't seem like she was showing favoritism to a certain house over another. I'm also very curious about Aberforth's role. I really have no idea what it may be, but I can't wait to find out. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Fri Feb 9 18:12:03 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 13:12:03 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Krum's Intellect/Father Figures(Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) References: Message-ID: <002e01c74c75$cda844b0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164804 --Magpie wrote-- >>>I don't know how I missed this the first time--I agree with zanooda. Krum is never a dumb jock or not charming. He has an accent and he's a bit awkward, but he's never stupid or a jock. Nor is he any more of a gentleman at the end of the year than he was at the beginning, that I remember. He was always the way he is (and never wavered from his fixation on Hermione). I don't remember Hermione saying anything about his lack of wit. Also, he's never a 'celebrity Krum' who would have said "See you around, then." He's trying to get her to visit him in Bulgaria after the Second Task. I don't think this has to do with manners, exactly, though. Krum's not interested in his fangirls and he really likes Hermione and is jealous of her attentions to Harry. (His trouble with her name isn't really fair--there's no reason he should mispronounce her name that way. I always thought it was JKR's clever way of giving the pronounciation to the many readers who were apparently unfamiliar with it and mispronounced it as they read.)<<< --Ronin's Comments-- I remember that I've always had the opinion that Krum was a bit slow when it came to certain things, not the best communicator and somewhat of a celebrity jock type. But, my personal feelings aside I will wait until I can re-read the book before I make any further comments on the subject because I fear that my perceptions have been clouded by the movie. Betsy Hp wrote-- >>>Well, yeah. But when Harry is in trouble or is troubled, he doesn't seek out McGonagall. He turns to Lupin or Arthur or Sirius or even Snape.<<< --Ronin's Comments-- I haven't really been following the father figure thread, but I spotted this and had to comment. In OotP, Harry wants desperately seeks out McGonagall after his dreams. She takes him to DD after the first dream which saves Arthur Weasley and after the second dream (during his Magical History OWL) he can't find her because she's been sent to St. Mungo's. He thinks something to the effect that the one person he never thought would fail to be there for him is gone. She was his rock whenever he needed someone. "There was nobody left to tell. Dumbledore had gone, Hagrid had gone, but he had always expected Professor McGonagall to be there, irascible and inflexible, perhaps, but always dependably, solidly present...." - pg. 730, 1st American Edition, Hardcover, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix I also think that McGonagall is very protective over Harry, like a son or grandson. From the beginning, it is her that gets him on the quiditch team. She stands up for him against Umbridge and is always there to keep things fair between Harry and Snape or Harry and the Slytherins in general. McGonagall, pledges to help him become an auror if it's the last thing she does and advises him to take his potions NEWTS when Slughorne takes over. Aside from how she is with Harry, I think Minerva McGonagall is one of my favorite characters. She's a strong and talented witch who is not afraid to twist the rules to make a stand for a fair and just outcome. She's also, probably Dumbledore's closest ally and confidant, not to mention at least temporarily, his successor. I wouldn't be surprised if she convinces Harry to return to Hogwarts in DH, to finish his NEWTS and enter into his Auror training. She may also have some special instructions left behind by Dumbledore to help Harry. I think she will play a big role in the finale. --zgirnius wrote-- >>>Sorry to interrupt...Snape? When was this? I also can't recall Harry turning to Arthur for help, though that is less interesting. And (despite your feelings about it) by the conditions you are giving for impartant father figures, Dumbledore should be on the list. He both is a figure that can make Harry think, and one to whom he turns when he is emotionally troubled. However, I'm not arguing that there aren't some important father figures in the story, only that Lupin isn't one of them.<<< Ronin's Comments-- The only time I can ever recall Harry turning to Snape is out of desperation in OotP. When he is in Umbridge's office and he tells Snape that Sirius is in trouble at the MoM. During this scene, Harry thinks to himself that he'd never even considered Snape, the only remaining member of the order at Hogwarts. Harry does turn to Arthur a bit, but Arthur isn't really around all that much to be considered a steady parental figure. However, in the beginning of HBP, Harry pulls Arthur aside on platform 9 3/4, to tell him about Draco Malfoy's side trip in Diagon Alley. Arthur is also the one who brings Harry to his trial in OotP and tries to support him and who tries to look out for him as if he were his own son on many occasions. This doesn't make Arthur a true father figure which could mold Harry's character, but in a caring compassionate way, he is someone who Harry can look up to and come to for help and who can teach Harry through his example of being a family man. Dumbledore is Harry's mentor. I agree that he should be on any list of fatherly figures in Harry's life. Lupin was sort of fatherly in PoA, teaching Harry to get in touch with his feelings and use his inner strengths to overcome the desperation he felt when facing the dementors. He wasn't much of a father figure after PoA though, mainly because he was off watching after the werewolves and couldn't be around much. Harry seems to look up to Lupin and really care for and trust him. Lupin does try to help him with his grief and emotional issues, etc, but he's not a steady father figure. He's more like an uncle I'd say. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 18:55:00 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:55:00 -0000 Subject: The Killing Curse and Horcruzes WAS:Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164805 > Annemehr: > Why would an AK rebound from Voldemort? As far as I know, it would > hit Voldemort and destroy his body; the only difference from usual > being that his (piece of) soul would remain bound to Earth. I always > thought it was the more unusual event of the AK rebounding from baby > Harry that destroyed the house. zgirnius: The AK does not customarily harm the body of its victim (except for the minor detail of death ), let alone destroy it completely. Whether that destruction had to do with Harry's protection, or Horcruxes, is really an open question. It always seemed to me that an AK should, logically, have no effect on a wizard with a Horcrux. It does no damage, and he can't be killed- why doesn't he just keep going? (In particular, I see no evidence that this is not what would usually happen in the Potterverse - GH being a unique incident with unknown factors at work). Annemehr: > But in any case, if we are counting deaths, then by leaving LV in his > body, DD is responsible for the deaths of the people on the collapsed > bridge, maybe some in the "hurricane," Madam Bones, Emmeline Vance, > and Hannah Abbot's mother. "Anyone we know dead?" Ron would ask > Hermione, every time she opened the Daily Prophet. [HBP ch. 11, 221 > US] zgirnius: No, Harry is. He stopped Sirius and Lupin from killing Peter. Seriously, Dumbledore could not anticipate exactly who, and how many, would die in an ongoing reign of terror. Further, now that Voldemort is back, and his loyal supporters out of Azkaban, why would DD suppose they wouldn't cook up a new body for LV pronto? And continue carrying out any plans that might already have been made while waiting? From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Feb 9 19:04:36 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 19:04:36 -0000 Subject: Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164806 > Annemehr: > Well okay, but *if* DD would have wanted to *prevent* LV regaining > a physical body, by preventing Pettigrew's escape, then why isn't > LV a vapor *now,* when he so easily could be? > > "'You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?' called Voldemort, his > scarlet eyes narrowed over the top of the shield. 'Above such > brutality, are you?'" [OoP ch. 36, US p. 814] > Anyway, we know that at the time of that duel in the Ministry, > Dumbledore was already aware that LV had at least one Horcrux to > tie LV's soul to Earth. > The inescapable conclusion is that DD *wants* LV to have a body > these days. It *has* to be part of the Plan -- that Plan that we > *still* don't know, and which inevitably entails the cost of the > many collateral deaths we read about in HBP. Jen: It's also possible given the way Voldemort rebirthed that Dumbledore *couldn't* turn him to vapor again in the MOM or that it was impossible to do so without also killing Harry: 'and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives'. I've been considering whether the method of rebirth is another part of Voldemort's self-fulfilling prophecy, the action that made the last part of the propehcy come true (rather than that sentence referring to Harry as a Horcrux vs. the transfer of powers). Yes, all things being equal to pre-GOF days Dumbledore should have been able to turn him to vapor, but JKR has specifically said there's a reason Dumbledore didn't try to kill him. You say the reason is Dumbledore's plan and I say it's the mystery of what happened in the graveyard--LV isn't the same guy he was when he turned to vapor the first time: "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." (TLC/MN) Jen again: There's something about the way Voldemort came to have an actual fetal body that we don't know about yet and the way he rebirthed (the gleam) that factor into this equation. Even though I can't guess what it means, I still believe the graveyard will prove to be the critical part of the story and that the Horcruxes alone were not the reason Dumbledore didn't make an attempt at the MOM. Jen R. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 19:42:06 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 19:42:06 -0000 Subject: Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164807 Carol earlier: > Still, in light of what actually did happen (and possibly the death of Sirius Black after all Lupin went through to prove him innocent to HRH), I can see why [Lupin would] be unhappy with himself. If only he'd just explained everything to Dumbledore in the first place. DD would have talked to Black, found out about Scabbers, had Pettigrew arrested, and Voldie would still be vapor. > > Annemehr: > Well okay, but *if* DD would have wanted to *prevent* LV regaining a > physical body, by preventing Pettigrew's escape, then why isn't LV a > vapor *now,* when he so easily could be? Carol responds: Sorry to be unclear. I was trying to present what I see as Lupin's perspective, his realization that his actions (and persistent inaction) in PoA had undesirable consequences. If he's dwelling on if only's and might-have-beens, on his mistakes and misjudgments, he may be trying to punish himself for those rather than for being a werewolf, if indeed he's trying to punish himself at all. Like Snape, I'm not at all sure what goes on in Lupin's mind, but I'm considering why he *might* (not necessarily *would*) be unhappy with himself. But, uh, erm, I don't understand what Dumbledore has to do with it, except in terms of what Lupin may think might have happened "if only" he hadn't rushed out without taking his potion, "if only" he'd told Dumbledore the whole truth about Sirius Black from the moment of his arrival at the school. And if he'd turned in the Marauder's Map, the whole incident would not have happened because he wouldn't have been looking for HRH and spotted Pettigrew instead. I also really don't understand your question. Let me try to figure this out. You think that if Lupin had confided the truth to Dumbledore (which I think, or hope, he regrets not doing), that Dumbledore would have questioned Sirius Black (which I also think) and discovered the truth about Pettigrew. Okay, I'm with you so far. All we have to do is have Dumbledore rather than Black and Lupin bring Scabbers back to human form, hear the whole story, and call in Fudge to take the right person back to Azkaban, pending a trial, and Sirius Black gets a pardon and a chance at a normal life. No need for Harry to prevent James's friends from committing murder. No opportunity for Pettigrew to escape to Voldemort. Of course, in terms of the story, especially GoF, Pettigrew's escape is absolutely essential. But why would *Dumbledore* want it to happen? Annemehr: > So, DD is not too noble to kill the likes of Voldemort. And, DD was at least pretty certain that if he had tried to kill LV in that MoM duel, he would merely have returned him to the vapor state. Everything could have returned to pre-GoF conditions, except for Sirius's death. Yet, DD did not do it. Carol: Why didn't Dumbledore vaporize LV in the MoM? (Not that the question has anything to do with my point on Lupin's possible regrets, but, okay. I'll answer.) As you say, he knew about the Horcruxes, but I don't think that's all there is to it. I *do* think DD is "above such brutality" since, unlike Harry, who can use Love, he'd have to use an Unforgiveable Curse to kill LV--but the attempt would be futile, anyway, since LV wouldn't be killed. DD also knows that it's Harry's job, not his, to destroy Voldemort. Leaving LV as a vapor in PoA would have bought DD and Harry some time. Now, however, it's pointless. Vaporizing him would start the whole process over again. It would give away the Horcrux secret (everyone from Fudge to Harry would know that something is preventing LV from dying, not once but twice). DD doesn't want LV to know that he knows about the Horcruxes, so he lets him think that his nobility is the primary reason for not killing him rather than a secondary one. But vaporizing him at this late date is pointless. He wants the WW to know that Voldemort has returned, that he's responsible for Cedric's murder, that he has followers now (as he didn't in PoA, when he was "alone and friendless." Wormtail and Voldie's other followers, not all of whom have been arrested, would just restore him again, using someone other than Harry to provide the blood. Nope. Too late to vaporize him now. Revaporizing him in OoP would be different from keeping him as a vapor in PoA. Time to send Harry after the Horcruxes, and the sooner, the better. Annemehr: > Why wouldn't DD do it? > > The inescapable conclusion is that DD *wants* LV to have a body these days. Carol: Not at all "inescapable," as I've just shown. Wanting him to have a body, or accepting the necessity of his having a body, in OoP, after the murders in GoF (not just Cedric but Bertha and a poor old Muggle that the WW doesn't care about and, indirectly, Mr. Crouch) is different from wanting him to have a body in PoA. Surely, Dumbledore would have preferred matters to remain as they were in Cos and PoA, with Voldie posing a remote and future threat rather than the actual danger he presents in GoF through HBP. The only life lost in SS/PS is Quirrell's. No life is lost in Cos or PoA. I've listed the deaths in GoF. In OoP, we have Bode, killed by a potted plant by a DE on Voldemort's orders, and Sirius Black, killed by a DE thanks to Voldemort's MoM plot. In HBP, we have not only those "collateral deaths" but Dumbledore himself, who would be very much alive if Lupin had only told DD what he knew about Sirius Black, preventing the escape of Wormtail and the restoration of Voldemort to his body. Annemehr: It *has* to be part of the Plan -- that Plan that we *still* don't know, and which inevitably entails the cost of the many collateral deaths we read about in HBP. > > And, given that, it's also reasonable to conclude that Pettigrew was supposed to escape. Carol: Oh, I think there's a plan all right, but it mostly involves Harry and Snape, but it could have been implemented later and more effectively if Wormtail had not escaped, ending the respite the WW had enjoyed since Godric's Hollow. I don't see collateral deaths as part of the plan. Instead, they're an unfortunate consequence of Voldie's return to his body, which DD can't undo without starting the process over again. Now, at least, Fudge and the WW know what they're facing if Voldemort is not destroyed. Unfortunately, thanks to Wormtail's escape, they, and Harry, are facing those consequences years or even decades sooner than they might have done if Lupin had only told DD what he knew about Sirius Black. (And no. I'm not blaming Lupin for the unforeseen consequences of his unfortunate actions and inactions. If I blame anybody, it's Voldie for casting the DADA curse.) > Annemehr: > saying, it's Guilty!DD, I'm telling you... Carol: Even if DD wanted Wormtail to escape as you suggest, how could he possibly have known that Wormtail, regarded by everyone as hopeless at magic, could possibly restore Voldemort to physical form? He hadn't heard Trelawney's second prophecy, which didn't occur until the night before Wormtail's escape. And until that night, DD, like everyone else, thought that PP was dead and that Sirius Black was his murderer. Carol, who never dreamed that her suggestion about Lupin's possible regrets would spawn a Guilty!DD thread! From fireemtgirl at gmail.com Fri Feb 9 19:51:25 2007 From: fireemtgirl at gmail.com (kayakknitter) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 19:51:25 -0000 Subject: The intellect of Krum In-Reply-To: <002101c74c6e$dfd525b0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164808 > > --Ronin's Comments-- > ..."Krum's stumbling over her name is just a small bit of evidence > though. Considering that he was at Hogwarts and speaking with her > for nearly an entire school year, I'd have expected any fairly > bright person to be able to pronounce her name by the summer > holiday. Hermione's name aside, she comments that he's not the > brightest boy at some point. Unfortunately, I can not recite the > exact quote because I don't have my copy of the book. I also > believe that someone (Moody, I think) calls him a dolt at one point > and says he would never make it through the tournament without > Karkarof's coaching. Again, I apologize if I'm getting the movie > mixed up with the book, but I am 99% certain that Hermione mentions > his lack of intelligence (not necessarily the word she uses) at > some point in the book. They really have nothing in common and he > just watches her read...." There are some names that are very difficult period to pronounce for a non-native English speaker. Hermoine's name is one of them. English is the hardest language to learn for a non-native speaker. And sadly, many native English speakers have problems with their own language. So the fact that Viktor still had problems saying Hermoine's name after a full school term doesn't surprise me. And since I just watched the movie, Hermoine does say a line in the movie about that he watches her study when they are in the library. I am pretty sure that there is a similar line in the book as well. Everyone has different study skills and ways of obtaining knowledge. Hermoine's learning style is intellectual meaning that she learns best form books. Viktor's learning style is more than likely psycho-motor meaning he learns by doing. kayakknitter From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Feb 9 20:20:41 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 20:20:41 -0000 Subject: The intellect of Krum In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164810 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zgirnius" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > > > From: Ronin_47 > > > on his lack of wit. But at the end of the book I remember he > > > tracked her down to say goodbye and ask her to write. He still > > > stumbled over her name, but was making an effort. The celebrity > > > Krum who first arrived at Hogwarts would've probably just said, > > > "Well, see ya 'round then". > > > > Bart: > > Some names are very difficult to pronounce by someone who comes > from another country. Even many English speakers would probably > pronounce the name "her mine ee" rather than "her my-o knee". And > remember, Krum was eligible for the Wizard's Cup. > > > > zgirnius: > Indeed, I was unaware that the name is Greek in origin, so I always > read it "Hermy-own", since in English phonetics, single e's at the > end of words are usually silent. I only learned the correct > pronunciation when I saw a movie. (Born and raised in the US). Geoff: Being from the UK helps. Many years ago, there was a very funny actress who appeared regularly on the radio called Hermione Gingold and was a leading character in the film "Gigi". There was also a second film actress called Hermione Baddelely who appeared, inter alia, in "Mary Poppins". So I think that many UK English speakers would correctly pronounce the name. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Feb 9 20:26:31 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 20:26:31 -0000 Subject: Krum's Intellect/Father Figures(Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164811 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: Magpie: (Though Krum's > accept isn't correct for Bulgarian anyway. I think what he's got is > your basic B-movie vampire accent.) Geoff: This is a bit off-topic but you have made a serious error in that comment. Stanislav Ianevski, who plays Krum in the medium which dare not speak its name, IS Bulgarian; he was born in Sofia in 1985. So you can't accuse him of having a crummy accent. :-)) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 20:44:59 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 20:44:59 -0000 Subject: Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164812 Annemehr wrote: > >The inescapable conclusion is that DD *wants* LV to have a body these days. It *has* to be part of the Plan -- that Plan that we *still* don't know, and which inevitably entails the cost of the many collateral deaths we read about in HBP. > > Bart: > (Agreeing) With the horcruxes, Dumbledore could not have killed Voldemort. Therefore, there must be a key vulnerability in this particular body of which Dumbledore wishes to take advantage. > Carol responds: Your point explains nicely why DD wouldn't want to *re*vaporize Voldemort, as opposed to leaving him as vapor in PoA if he'd been given that choice. And Jen's point about not being able to vaporize Voldie without risking killing Harry, whom LV was possessing, is another good reason for not vaporizing Voldie in the MoM that I overlooked in my initial response to Annemehr. But "a key vulnerability in this particular body" doesn't mean DD would have wanted Wormtail to escape and resurrect Voldemort in the first place, which is what Annemehr is arguing in the post you're responding to. DD could not have anticipated that Wormtail would restore Voldemort to *any* body, much less a body partially created with Harry's blood. So choosing not to vaporize Voldemort in the MoM for whatever reason does not prove that he wanted Wormtail to *un*vaporize Voldemort in the first place. (See upthread for the Wormtail/Guilty!DD portion of the argument.) Carol, not buying Guilty!DD *wanting* Wormtail to escape or granting him quite the degree of omniscience required by Annemehr's version of the (hypothetical) Plan From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 20:52:19 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 20:52:19 -0000 Subject: The intellect of Krum In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164813 --- "kayakknitter" wrote: > > > > --Ronin's Comments-- > > ..."Krum's stumbling over her name is just a small > > bit of evidence> though. ...." > kayakknitter> > > There are some names that are very difficult period to > pronounce for a non-native English speaker. Hermoine's > name is one of them. English is the hardest language > to learn for a non-native speaker. ... > > ... > > Everyone has different study skills and ways of > obtaining knowledge. Hermoine's learning style is > intellectual meaning that she learns best form books. > Viktor's learning style is more than likely psycho-motor > meaning he learns by doing. > > kayakknitter > bboyminn: I'm not saying much more than I agree but hopefully I can do it in a way that expands the conversation. I was on a business trip with a couple of Korean friends and we stopped on Santa Monica pier and went out the the restaurant on the end; a restaurant with a decidedly Mexican flavor. My friends asked what I thought they should get, and I recommended Frajitas. We then commenced an endless dialog in which I tried to explain to them how to pronounce 'Frajita' which was 'Fra-He-Ta'. They just couldn't get it. Apparently that combination of sounds and syllables is just to unnatural to them. As we left, one of my Korean friends took a plactic clylinder from his pocket, flicked a switch on the end causing a flame to appear at the tip, waved it around and exclaimed "Mr.Lee, la-he-ta...la-he-ta"; meaning of course, 'lighter'. That was as close as he could come to something that sounded similar to Frajita. This particular friend has a degree in astrophysics and has lived in the USA for 20 years. Even after several more visits to Mexican restaurants over the years, they still haven't been able to say 'Fra-He-Ta'. By the way, they loved the Frajita's, they just couldn't say it. Her-my-oh-nee could just be a combination of sound that is completey foreign to a Bulgarian. I suspect there are a lot of Slavic and Germanic influences on the Bulgarian language, and as others have pointed out, that deals with a lot of harsh, hard, and somewhat gutteral sounds. As to Viktor's intellect, I'm also in agreement with KayakKnitter. Intelligence and intellect don't go hand in hand. You can be moderately intelligent and superbly intellectual, or you can be highly intelligent and only moderately intellectual. I suspect in his native Bulgaria, Krum is considered quite sophisticated and intelligent. I suspect he shows his intelligence in his refinement of speech and his sophicticated tastes. I have alway speculated (pure speculation) that in his country, Viktor's family is on a par with the Malfoys. Not literally equal to the Malfoys in wealth, but in his country, he is at the rough social strata. Still when Viktor is forced into a foriegn culture, with foreign customs and values, as well as a foriegn language, he is out of his element. Keep in mind that when we as Americans travel to foriegn countries we don't come of as being too bright. Most people in Europe speak three or four languages at least sufficiently to function in those particular countries. Most Americans, sadly, barely speak English. So, back to Viktor, I think his intelligence and intellect are not simply vocal. He expresses himself by action, and learns by doing, but that uniqueness doesn't in any diminish is intellect. As a side note to KayakKnitter, don't this knit kayaks go all limp and soggy when you put then in the water? Steve/bboyminn From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Feb 9 20:57:48 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 20:57:48 -0000 Subject: Krum's Intellect/Father Figures(Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164814 > Magpie: > (Though Krum's > > accept isn't correct for Bulgarian anyway. I think what he's got is > > your basic B-movie vampire accent.) > > Geoff: > This is a bit off-topic but you have made a serious error in that > comment. > > Stanislav Ianevski, who plays Krum in the medium which dare not > speak its name, IS Bulgarian; he was born in Sofia in 1985. > > So you can't accuse him of having a crummy accent. :-)) Magpie: Heaven forfend! I have not made that serious error--I wasn't referring to Stanislav Ianevski's accent. I was talking about Viktor in the books, not the movies. I have't seen GoF. kayakknitter: There are some names that are very difficult period to pronounce for a non-native English speaker. Hermoine's name is one of them. English is the hardest language to learn for a non-native speaker. And sadly, many native English speakers have problems with their own language. So the fact that Viktor still had problems saying Hermoine's name after a full school term doesn't surprise me. Magpie: I'm sticking to my guns that I doubt HER-MO-NINNY is the natural Bulgarian-accent difficulty translation of HER-MY-O-NEE. (The name itself is originally Greek and I'd assume how difficult it was to pronounce for a non-English speaker depended on the native language of the speaker.) But I agree there's nothing stupid about Krum mispronouncing her name, or not learning to pronounce it better if he can't at first. Perhaps if we were getting the books from Fleur's pov she'd be spending her time trying and failing to get the Weasleys to say "Fleur" instead of "Floor" when they pronounced her name. I'm just saying that the fact that JKR decided to make Viktor pronounce Hermione's name that way, we should not assume that she's researched what syllables are or are not difficult to put together if you're Bulgarian. Viktor's accent isn't exactly a primer on Bulgarian-based phoentics.:-) kayakknitter: Everyone has different study skills and ways of obtaining knowledge. Hermoine's learning style is intellectual meaning that she learns best form books. Viktor's learning style is more than likely psycho- motor meaning he learns by doing. Magpie: Viktor is an athlete, yes, but what do we know about his schoolwork? Especially in his native language? I don't honestly remember anything specific being told to us about his grades at Durmstrang. Perhaps he is a big reader. His difficulty in speaking with Hermione and others is also hampered by language. I'm sure he sounds a lot smarter when not struggling with English. (Viktor's already far beyond Hermione in that sense since he speaks two languages.) -m (who also was familiar with the name Hermione and Hermione Gingold before she read the books, despite not being English) From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Fri Feb 9 21:31:11 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 16:31:11 -0500 Subject: Magical Theory (WAS Re: Krum's Intellect/Father Figures(Karkaroff as Headmaster) (WAS: Snape&Lucius) References: Message-ID: <001201c74c91$9f03e530$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164815 All of this talk about Victor Krum's accent and dialect, etc. has gotten me to wondering.... Throughout the series, there seems to be a very defined way of pronunciation when casting a spell, as well as a specific wand movement. Spells seem to have various origins, but most seem to be based on Latin. So, given these intricacies, how can certain schools cast certain spells such as "Wingardium Leviosa"? That's Leviooosa, not Leviosaaa. Could it be the intention behind the words that is more important? Or, perhaps a visualization? Then why make such a big deal about pronuciation? I would think that non-verbal spells would be much easier if language was not a factor. Also, if the PERSON is magical, why is the wand so necessary to cast spells? Harry can cast accidentally when he becomes emotional and Dumbledore seems to be able to cast some spells without a wand (perhaps using old magic). But mostly, wizards and witches without wands are helpless. Shouldn't they be able to learn and control their power without the use of a wand at some point? I expect the Ministry of Magic, Department of Magical Education and Practical Application of Magic to launch a full investifation. lol Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 9 22:51:30 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 22:51:30 -0000 Subject: The importance of wands (Was: Magical Theory) In-Reply-To: <001201c74c91$9f03e530$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164816 Ronin wrote: > Also, if the PERSON is magical, why is the wand so necessary to cast spells? Harry can cast accidentally when he becomes emotional and Dumbledore seems to be able to cast some spells without a wand (perhaps using old magic). But mostly, wizards and witches without wands are helpless. > Shouldn't they be able to learn and control their power without the use of a wand at some point? Carol responds: Maybe "at some point" is the key phrase here. We see a bit of controlled wandless magic (Dumbledore's "change of decoration" through clapping his hands, Snape's summoning the ends of the cords binding about-to-transform Lupin by snapping his fingers) and quite a bit of uncontrolled wandless magic (from Harry's making his hair grow as a small child to his "blowing up" Aunt Marge in PoA), so clearly a wand helps to control and focus the magic. (Imagine an Avada Kedavra or even a Petrificus Totalus coming out of your hand. And, no, Pippin, I don't think "Quirrell raised his hand to perform a powerful curse" means that he wasn't holding a wand in that hand.) But a wand is magical in itself. It's not just a stick like a prettily carved conductor's baton. The wood a wand is made of along with the "powerful magical substance" that forms its core determines the qualities of that specific wand. Note that Lily's first wand was "a nice wand for Charm work" (a hint about DH Lily?) in contrast to James's, which was a little more powerful and suited for Transfiguration (a big hint toward Animagus James, whom we learn about in PoA). "the wand chooses the wizard," and the immensely powerful yew and Phoenix feather wand (brother to the one that would eventually choose Harry) chose Tom Riddle. Yew and phoenix feathers are both associated with immortality, Tom Riddle's ultimate goal. "You never get such good results with another wizard's wand" (as Neville's struggle with his father's wand illustrates). So the wand and the wizard work together, the wand sensing the wizard's intention even in a nonverbal spell. the more powerful and skilled the wizard, and perhaps the more suited the wand to the wizard, the better this process works (which is why, IMO, Voldemort would never relinquish the wand that has served his needs and desires so well, performing "great but terrible" feats, for any other wand, Priori Incantatem effect or no). Think about Ollivander and his shop, how he remembers every wand he ever made, how the whole shop tingles with magical power when Harry enters. It takes, IMO, a highly skilled and very powerful wizard to make a wand, and Ollivander has made hundreds or thousands, each one unique, some more powerful than others. A unicorn hair in an ash wand is different from a unicorn hair in a mahogany wand, and Ollivander knows how each substance will react to each wood. It isn't just a matter of length and flexibility (the obvious differences we see in the weighing of the wands in GoF). The materials make a difference, too. Ollivander won't use Veela hair because it's too "temperamental." I take all this to mean that a wand, like the wizard it chooses, has specific strengths and even, to some extent, a personality--which is not to say that Barty Jr. can't use Harry's wand to cast a Dark Mark or Sirius Black couldn't have used Snape's wand to kill Wormtail, as he intended. But I'll bet that the DEs who escaped from Azkaban were using borrowed or stolen wands, their own having been confiscated or destroyed when they were arrested, which could partly account for their ineptitude in the MoM. Of course, JKR isn't altogether consistent on this point. Ron does reasonably well with his brother Charlie's old wand until its broken in CoS, and when he gets a new wand, it, too, has a unicorn hair core (maybe Charlie's and Ron's personalities and magical abilities are similar enough that Charlie's wand worked for Ron almost as well as his own, while Neville is different enough from his Auror father to make Frank's wand a serious mismatch for him?) At any rate, I think that wands are more than a conduit for the wizard's magic. They are themselves powerful magical objects, and for most wizards, they're an essential part of the magic, just as a computer an essential part of Internet communication. Apparation and transforming into an Animagus form don't require a wand, but most magic, even potion-making, requires one. Carol, noting that even Dumbledore was powerless without a wand (unless, perhaps, he could have summoned Fawkes but chose not to do so) From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 10 00:01:44 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:01:44 -0000 Subject: Father Figures (Karkaroff as Headmaster (WAS: Snape&Lucius) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164817 > >>zgirnius: > > > > I would agree that Lupin has more importance to the story > > than McG because of the emotional conection he has to James (and > > Lily?), who are a part of the story, true, but not to Harry. > >>Magpie: > > His emotional connection to James and Lily gives him more emotional > connection to Harry--certainly more than McGonagall. Harry knows a > lot more about Lupin's emotional life and mistakes etc. than he > does with McGonagall--and so do we. Betsy Hp: Exactly. Lupin has a greater emotional impact on Harry than McGonagall. There's a connection there, a personal connection, that is missing with Harry's interactions with McGonagall. But I think (reading through various comments) that I've been unclear about what I mean with the term "father-figure". I'm not trying to say that Lupin is the most important adult male in Harry's life. Nor am I, by labeling Lupin a father-figure, trying to say that Lupin has a perfectly positive impact on Harry's life. Harry has many father- figures; every single one of those men are flawed, often in great and fatal ways. If I were to map it out I'd put James at the head of a triangle: he is Father, both biologically and as Harry's ideal. And for a long time he stayed that ideal for Harry. The two branches off of James are Lupin and Sirius. They both represented James to Harry. And (and I find this fascinating, myself ) Sirius and Lupin mirrored two different responses at being father-figures or James's stand-ins for Harry. Sirius was so gung-ho Harry actually pulled away from him (in an effort to keep Sirius safe). And Lupin was remarkably reticent, forcing Harry to seek him out, as Debbie points out here: > >>Debbie: > > Overall, though, I think we don't see Lupin take on more of > a father-figure role because Lupin himself is reluctant to assume > that role. > Betsy Hp: So there's three possible fathers: James, Sirius, Lupin. And for various reasons (death, danger, reluctance) Harry is unable to fully lean on any of them. But, even with their weaknesses, Harry does gain something from all three of them. And both Sirius and Lupin provide forms of proof of James's love for Harry. Sirius by being a god-father (James cared enough to appoint a guardian), Lupin by giving Harry the Patronus spell (James as Prongs, a tireless protector). Standing opposite from James is Snape. He's the negative to James's positive, and he provides the adversary for Harry to test himself against. Snape is the opposite of an ideal. Snape's weaknesses are out there on display and he's everything Harry *doesn't* want to be. Snape is the one who sets limits (possibly to protect Harry's life, possibly to be an ass, depending on your favorite form of Snape ) and doles out punishment. Snape challenges the "ideal James" that Harry has set up in his head. Snape challenges James's stand-ins, Lupin and Sirius. And Snape reveals to Harry James's very human flaws. Looming over the James (Sirius, Lupin) <--> Snape diagram is the great patriarchal dichotomy of Dumbledore <--> Voldemort. Everything falls onto one side or another on this issue. And while Harry is very strongly (and I believe, without question) on the Dumbledore side of the issue, he has been shaped by Voldemort. There's the surface parsletongue, but also the deeper issue of Harry's life and sense of self being defined by his battle against Voldemort. But the tension between Dumbledore and Voldemort also effects the tension between James (with Lupin and Sirius) and Snape. Especially for Harry. As he picks and chooses among the various traits and philosophies he wants to gain from James (and therefore also Lupin and Sirius), and the stuff he wants to reject from Snape, it all seems very simple if James is "good" and Snape is "bad". It's what made Harry's hero-worship of the half-blood Prince so painful for him after the big reveal; it's what will make a DDM!Snape so interesting, IMO; and it's the reason I'm still intrigued by the possibility of an ESE!Lupin. (Is that sort of trade-off necessary, I wonder? Or has Peter Pettigrew provided enough shadow?) Down below James and Snape, but still linked to Dumbledore and Voldemort are the other more minor father-figures Harry has interacted with from PS to HBP. We've got Hagrid and Arthur on Dumbledore's side (both providing steady and solid support). And we've got Barty Jr. on Voldemort's side (giving Harry some important skills while also wanting Harry dead). All of these men have helped Harry figure out who he is and who he wants to be. And as the only major players still around, I strongly suspect both Lupin and Snape will have some sort of impact on Harry before Harry faces off against his "bad father", Voldemort. But what I don't see occuring is a strong effect from various mother- figures on Harry. Lily is mysterious and perfect and removed. She gave Harry life (twice) but she's still an untouched ideal for him. McGonagall is the remote "teacher". Yes, Harry learns from McGonagall, but nothing about his mother (as Lupin and Sirius link Harry back to his father) and nothing, IMO, that McGongall wouldn't teach any student under her care. There's not a real matriarchal dichotomy at play anywhere. I suppose the closest we get to that is McGonagall <--> Umbridge, but it's a much weaker story than the Dumbledore <--> Voldemort one, and in the end, it's D vs. V that prevails. The showdown at the MoM trumps the showdown in McGonagall's office. And Lily plays no part in either. So, in the end I don't think we'll get a complex adult female character in DH. I'm betting that what we learn about Lily will do more to effect Harry's view of some of his father-figures, not introduce him to a new mother-figure. (By DH Harry should be moving out beyond a need for either a mother or a father, anyway.) Betsy Hp From va32h at comcast.net Sat Feb 10 00:16:07 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:16:07 -0000 Subject: Lupin (was Re: Father Figures In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164818 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annemehr" wrote: Annemehr: For DDM!Snape adherents, there can be a simple explanation: Lupin is the Order member who had been given some inkling of what was to happen that night. Judging by his reactions, I would guess he did not know that Dumbledore was to die; that seems to have truly shocked him. But he may have been forewarned that Snape was about to do something, at DD's behest, that would appear absolutely traitorous. Lupin's harsh words about Snape come after everyone in the hospital wing had listened to Fawkes's song for a while. Perhaps the Phoenix song gave him the time and the courage to gather himself and play his part as he knew he must: to bolster everyone's conviction that Snape is a true DE. It would make sense. It would give DDM!Snape a contact, and a particularly safe one with regard to fooling LV, because Lupin is running with the werewolves these days, and we know the werewolves and the DEs can be buddies. va32h here: I had never thought of that! I suppose it will be hard for Snape to convince Harry that he was working for DD without some support. I just think that whole scene is odd. Throughout the books, Harry is always corrected if he refers to Snape as "Snape". Dumbledore, Lupin, McGonnagal, all remind him "Professor Snape". And yet as soon as Harry tells them about DD, they're all calling him "Snape". It just made me think that they had never trusted him anyway, and were only trusting DD's trust. Which I suppose could also be part of Lupin's act. But it's such an involuntary thing... I don't know. I think several characters are OOC in that scene. va32h From kjones at telus.net Sat Feb 10 01:43:09 2007 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:43:09 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45CD232D.1040705@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164819 >>> Annemehr: >>> Well okay, but *if* DD would have wanted to *prevent* LV > regaining a >>> physical body, by preventing Pettigrew's escape, then why isn't > LV a >>> vapor *now,* when he so easily could be? >>> >>> "'You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?' called Voldemort, his >>> scarlet eyes narrowed over the top of the shield. 'Above such >>> brutality, are you?'" [OoP ch. 36, US p. 814] >>> >>> (Well, actually, no he isn't. Dumbledore cannot be too noble to > *kill* >>> the likes of LV, if he is not too noble to charge a 16-year-old > boy >>> with the task. [HBP ch. 23, US pp. 510-512]) >>> > Annemehr KJ Writes: I think that part of it is that Dumbledore has made it his responsibility to do everything he can to get rid of Voldemort completely. If he just vaporized him again, Dumbledore would probably not live long enough to set the plan in motion. He is already 150 years old. He intended to see the end of Voldemort, but was too damaged by the protections on the horcrux, and finally Snape's dispatch. I think that he felt that everything was set up as best he could and was able to leave it in the hands of Harry. As long as Harry knows that he has to find all of the horcruxes first, he will end up in a position to do something about Voldemort. Snape, is presumably in a position to assist Harry. KJ From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sat Feb 10 02:29:54 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 18:29:54 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Father Figures (was: Wanted! Complex Adult Female...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0702091829t749d1d06p51a6a2c62c1229a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164820 >>zgirnius: > And in my opinion, his absence in the last three books confirms to > me that a certain section of fandom was wrong. Lynda: And if he had been truly absent, I would agree with you, but he shows up from time to time, and Harry still relies him. No, he's not around enough to be a father figure to Harry. He's too reclusive and self-loathing for that. But he does remain as a presence in Harry's life. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Feb 10 02:57:23 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 02:57:23 -0000 Subject: The importance of wands (Was: Magical Theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164821 > Carol responds: . And, no, Pippin, I don't think "Quirrell raised his hand to perform a powerful curse" means that he wasn't holding a wand in that hand.) > Pippin: Quirrell conjures ropes by snapping his fingers, taps his way around the frame of the mirror, claps his hands to release Harry from the ropes, unwinds his turban, grabs Harry by the wrist, and finally puts "both hands" on Harry's neck. It's all extremely awkward if he's supposed to be juggling a wand. I used to think that Rowling might have conceived the scene before she'd worked out the rules of wand use, but that seems unlikely at this point, since powerful wizards use wandless magic on occasion throughout the books. Pippin From cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com Fri Feb 9 23:45:06 2007 From: cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com (Unspeakable) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 23:45:06 -0000 Subject: In My End Is My Beginning: Speculation on the End of the Series Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164822 Hello, Have just updated my website with some further ideas on the ending of Deathly Hallows which I thought might be of interest to some of you. :--) In particular, my theory... a) Contains (what I hope is) a time-travel scenario based on the principles of POA21- nothing happens which has not (in a sense) already happened ("you must not be seen", etc.) but something important is *achieved* nonetheless... b) Attempts to tackle JKR's "crucial and central question" from 2004 of why *both* Harry & Voldemort survived the Killing Curse. c) Includes the invisibility cloak (never asked question?) and non-verbal spells. d) Features the brother wands, Fawkes the Phoenix and Harry's scar. e) Involves Harry's (past and future) defeats of Voldemort (on a single night). f) Intends to address Harry's 'phoenix-like' survival, death and (sort of!) immortality. Plus: g) Snape gets a posthumous payoff. h) Wormtail's debt is paid - but not by dying. http://book7.co.uk/fifteen/ Anyway, two versions are available for your perusal. The first one: http://book7.co.uk/sixteen/ is compatible with Horcrux!Harry; the new alternative: http://book7.co.uk/second-sight/ does not require that Harry's scar is a Horcrux. I would of course be very interested in any feedback (if you have time) especially on the whole concept of time-travel in the Potterverse & how it is handled. I also postulate a HBP!Dumbledore time-traveling in DH here: http://book7.co.uk/ten/ Regards, Cassy V. P.S. Those who've visited before will know that the site is written as a 'synopsis' of book 7 - sort of an attempt to create a 'theory of everything' (O that 'twere possible!) - based on canon, JKR quotes and fan discussions, but necessarily involving a certain amount of artistic license. The approach has disadvantages but (hopefully!) some advantages as well, as it aims for coherence & is concerned with the overall implications of individual theories. Make of it what you will...! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com Sat Feb 10 02:43:07 2007 From: deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com (Deborah Krupp) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 18:43:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Killing Curse and Horcruzes WAS:Back to The Plan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <719771.54963.qm@web35001.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164823 zgirnius: The AK does not customarily harm the body of its victim (except for the minor detail of death ), let alone destroy it completely. Whether that destruction had to do with Harry's protection, or Horcruxes, is really an open question. deborah: We know from Dumbledore that he is sure Voldemort was planning to use Harry's death to create a horcrux. We don't really know much about what that entails. There is no evidence of what the Horcrux spell actually is or how it is performed, simultaneously with the AK curse, before it, after it, or whether it is a complete spell itself that does the killing and creates the Horcrux at the same time. Nor do we have evidence that a person's body and the bit of soul that resides in it, is not killed if that body is killed. All we know is that if someone has a horcrux he cannot be completely killed until all his horcruxes are destroyed. "Well, you split your soul, you see, and hide part of it in an object outside the body. Then, even if one's body is attacked or destroyed, one cannot die, for part of the soul remains earthbound and undamaged. But of course, existence in such a form..." Slughorn to Riddle in HBP, page 497 I believe if all of the soul within the person who was physically destroyed was safe and protected due to the horcruxes that person had in place, Slughorn would have said "all of the soul remains earthbound" or "the soul remains earthbound," but what he says is that "part of the soul remains earthbound." This means part of the soul does not remain earthbound; there is no other way to read this line, and as Slughorn instructed Voldemort about horcruxes, I think we must take him as the authority. I maintain that what happened at Godric's Hollow was that the spell cast by Voldemort bounced off Harry as he was protected by his mother's sacrifice and that spell then hit Voldemort. It split Voldemort's soul and killed the bit of his soul within his body simultaneously. The bit of his soul that had been ripped off was what wandered off to the woods to later be discovered by Pettigrew. As it was not trapped within a horcrux, it was free to move, think, behave in the manner that Voldemort did. In the grand scheme of these books, what does this mean? The diary, the ring, possibly the locket (if it were destroyed by the mysterious RAB and if it were in fact a horcrux) and the bit that Voldemort killed himself have been obliviated. And of course, that there is no potential that Harry himself or his scar contain a bit of Voldemort's soul in a horcrux. I'm in the camp that Peter Pettigrew was there at Godric's Hollow,(who else could have given Voldemort his wand again?) and Peter blew up the Potter's residence, possibly to hide evidence and create confusion. My theory on Harry's scar is weak, even to me, but I contend that it was where Voldemort's very powerful spell cracked through and touched him. I've enjoyed reading this list. This is my first attempt to post to this group, so if the elves let it through, I'll be happy to read what you think of my thoughts... deborah --------------------------------- No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 10 03:35:07 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 03:35:07 -0000 Subject: HeadMaster Snape & The Battle of Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164824 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > "Steve" wrote: > > > > Carol responds: > I really like this idea, in part because it makes Snape highly > visible and because it enables him to "slither out of action" of the > murder-and-torture variety, which would be highly detrimental to > DDM!Snape, and because it sets up an emotionally charged encounter > between Snape and Harry. Snape could even enlist the aid of the > portraits and use, say, Portrait!Phineas as an intermediary between > Hogwarts and the Order while still pretending to be loyal to > Voldemort. Mike: I too like this idea of Steve's. Of course the open question still remains will Hogwarts even open this year? If McGonnagall becomes Headmistress - seems likely - she was leaning towards not re-openning at the end of HBP. I would also like to commend Carol on her interpretation of the use of portraits. This is about the extent of the help Harry or anybody should expect from the portraits, including Dumbledore's. I have read a lot of wild theories on how much help Harry might get from DD's portrait in the Head office. JKR has already explained that the portraits are but a faint imprint of person portrayed. (in the case of Madam Black - not so faint ) They are not the once powerful witches and wizards themselves and do not carry the font of knowledge they had when they were alive. If you reread what these portraits said and what they did you would find that they were hardly more than messengers on the one hand, and members of the peanut gallary on the other. I don't see Dumbledore's portrait being any different, not if JKR is going to remain consistant. > Carol cont.: > I considered the idea of Snape working with his seeming rival > Bellatrix to engineer a DE escape from Azkaban, during or after > which he would subvert Lucius Malfoy and a few others to rebel > against Voldemort, but I like your idea even better because it > recenters the action on Hogwarts. Mike: Can't we have both?! I like this idea too, Carol. Although, how about reuniting Lucius Malfoy with his son - and having Lucius remain in Voldie's camp - it could make for even more pressure on Draco and produce an interesting dynamic if Draco is eventually going to turn to the side of light. > Steve: > > attack at the Weasley Wedding, > > Carol: > Nor do I think we'll see an attack on the Weasley wedding, which > can easily be kept a secret (it would be ... folly to invite > Madame Maxime to fly in with her Abraxian horses. Keep it > quiet, all in the family. Mike: Question: Isn't it traditional that the wedding is held at or near the home and family of the bride? Why does everybody assume that the wedding between Bill and Fleur will be hosted by the Weasleys? Wouldn't this be the perfect time to get out of Britain, get away from the bubbling cauldron that is the British WW right now? It goes with tradition that this wedding would be in France and it has a much better chance of being unmarred if it is held there. As an aside - it would also mirror PoA if the book starts out with the whole Weasley family and Hermione out of the country, of course, this time Harry is too. > Carol, who doesn't expect a "bloodbath" but does interpret JKR's > unplanned deaths remark as implying planned deaths as well Mike, hoping JKR goes all William Wallace on us She does live in Scotland and Hogwarts is in Scotland. Sooo ... let's have Hogwarts Braveheart, waddaya say? :D From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 10 03:38:39 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 03:38:39 -0000 Subject: The intellect of Krum In-Reply-To: <002101c74c6e$dfd525b0$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164825 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ronin_47" wrote: > Krum's stumbling over her name is just a small bit of evidence > though. Considering that he was at Hogwarts and speaking with her > for nearly an entire school year, I'd have expected any fairly > bright person to be able to pronounce her name by the summer > holiday. > Hermione's name aside, she comments that he's not the brightest boy > at some point. Unfortunately, I can not recite the exact quote > because I don't have my copy of the book. I also believe that > someone (Moody, I think) calls him a dolt at one point and says he > would never make it through the tournament without Karkarof's > coaching. > Again, I apologize if I'm getting the movie mixed up with the book, > but I am 99% certain that Hermione mentions his lack of > intelligence (not necessarily the word she uses) at some point in > the book. They really have nothing in common and he just watches > her read.... zanooda: Hi again, Ronin! It was a relief to find out that you were influenced by the movie after all:-)! I think that your decision not to discuss Viktor Krum again until you reread GoF is very wise. Just a few last comments then... I think that Krum's inability to pronounce Hermione's name correctly is partly caused by the lack of practice. You remember (or maybe not :-)) that he only pronounced "Herm-own-ninny" once, and Hermione was immediately satisfied, saying it was "close enough". She never tried to correct him again, I guess, because she didn't care much how he called her, or maybe it amused her (it sounds cute, doesn't it?). If she corrected him every time they met and he called her by name, he would have learned eventually. But I think it's not important to Hermione; Krum could have taken "Grawp approach" and called her Hermy and she wouldn't have cared. When Krum talked to Harry about Hermione, Harry didn't correct him either. Krum is not much of a communicator, sure, but we don't know if he is not talkative by nature or just doesn't know English well enough (trust me, I know! I'm a regular chatterbox in my native language, but you can't get a word in English out of me). In any case, Krum is described as talking to his parents "in rapid Bulgarian". Next, I assure you that nowhere in the book does Hermione comment on Krum's mental abilities (she says that he is not good-looking though :-)), nor does Moody/Crouch calls him a dolt, whatever it might be. In the movie she said that he watches her study and that he is a physical being or something of the sort, but not in the book. I hope you will read GoF and then maybe you will agree that Viktor Krum is a very unpretentious boy, who hides his insecurities and vulnerability behind his gloomy exterior. Just be objective and don't let the movie influence you: real Krum is not that very handsome (to my taste, at least), self-assured and self-satisfied sports superstar that you saw there :-). Take care, Ronin! zanooda, who has a soft spot for Krum, being herself from "that" part of the world. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 10 04:04:23 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 04:04:23 -0000 Subject: The Killing Curse and Horcruzes WAS:Back to The Plan In-Reply-To: <719771.54963.qm@web35001.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164826 deborah wrote: > > We know from Dumbledore that he is sure Voldemort was planning to use Harry's death to create a horcrux. We don't really know much about what that entails. There is no evidence of what the Horcrux spell actually is or how it is performed, simultaneously with the AK curse, before it, after it, or whether it is a complete spell itself that does the killing and creates the Horcrux at the same time. Nor do we have evidence that a person's body and the bit of soul that resides in it, is not killed if that body is killed. All we know is that if someone has a horcrux he cannot be completely killed until all his horcruxes are destroyed. > > "Well, you split your soul, you see, and hide part of it in an object outside the body. Then, even if one's body is attacked or destroyed, one cannot die, for part of the soul remains earthbound and undamaged. But of course, existence in such a form..." Slughorn to Riddle in HBP, page 497 Carol responds: But you're not including the whole conversation here. To summarize, Tom follows up with "How do you split your soul?" to which Slughorn replies, in essence, "by the act of murder." Then Tom asks how you encase the soul bit, and Slughorn says "there is a spell. Don't ask me." So the act of murder and the encasement are separate processes. There's no spell that simultaneously kills and creates a Horcrux. Besides, all of Voldemort's victims that we know of whose soul bits could have been used to create a Horcrux were killed with either an AK (the Riddles and Frank Bryce) or poison (Hepzibah Smith) or a Basilisk (Myrtle). Logically, the murder splitting the soul occurs before the spell that encases it, though I realize some people argue that the spell could precede the murder (which pretty much eliminates most of our murder victims as Horcrux candidates (Tom Riddle *could* have taken the ring and even the diary with him when he murdered his parents, though the evidence indicates that he didn't go there with the intention of murdering them, but he didn't have the cup or the locket at that time, so there goes at least one and probably two wasted soul bits--Grandma and probably Grandpa murdered for nothing. Whereas if he could use the soul bits at any time, after he learned how to make Horcruxes, and there was no special two-birds-with-one-stone spell, he could use Myrtle for the diary, Tom Sr. for the ring, one grandparent for the locket, Hepzibah for the cup, and the other grandparent for the Ravenclaw Horcrux. Or, if you don't count Myrtle as a murder, there's a grandparent for the diary, dad for the ring, the other grandparent for the locket, Hepzibah for the cup, and the murdered Order member for the Ravenclaw Horcrux. Either way, Harry's murder, for which we know he tried to use a Killing Curse, could have been saved for the Gryffindor Horcrux, the Sword of Gryffindor, which he didn't have yet. I'm not saying that I have it right, only that it's almost certain that the soul splitting and the encasement are two separate operations, and it's more logical and economical in terms of known murders if the Horcruxes didn't have to be prepared in advance or the object present at the scene of the murder. deborah: > > I believe if all of the soul within the person who was physically destroyed was safe and protected due to the horcruxes that person had in place, Slughorn would have said "all of the soul remains earthbound" or "the soul remains earthbound," but what he says is that "part of the soul remains earthbound." This means part of the soul does not remain earthbound; there is no other way to read this line, and as Slughorn instructed Voldemort about horcruxes, I think we must take him as the authority. Carol: Exactly. The part of the soul that is not split off, the part that remains in the murderer. However, in the unlikely event that the murderer is vaporized, the main soul from which the soul bit was split off would remain anchored, but the unanchored soul bit could float freely off. IOW, when Voldie says he was *wrenched* from his body, less than the meanest ghost, he is still referring to *himself*, not to a soul bit. Otherwise, all the soul bits are potential Voldemorts. (The diary, which contains a *memory* of Tom that very nearly became reanimated because of *Ginny's* soul, could have become a second Tom with interesting results if Horcrux!Tom and Vapormort met, but I don't think the other Horcruxes have that ability. Their soul purpose is to anchor that main part of the soul (partial only because part has been split off) to the earth. Usually, of course, what's anchored remains within the murderer, but if his body is killed or destroyed, it remains alive. That's what happened to Voldemort. "Who would want to live in such a form?" as Slughorn says. Answer: Tom Riddle would. Better in his mind to float bodiless, having to possess animals to have a body, than to have his soul leave the earth, i.e., to die. He still has *himself* even without his body. And once he has a magically reconstituted body (with unicorn blood or wizard blood as a key ingredient), he has his powers again and can wield a wand. Carol, with apologies for not reposting the same old quotes but you can easily find them if you use Carol, Slughorn, and Horcrux as your search terms From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Feb 10 05:16:51 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 05:16:51 -0000 Subject: Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164827 Bart: > (Agreeing) With the horcruxes, Dumbledore could not have killed > Voldemort. Therefore, there must be a key vulnerability in this > particular body of which Dumbledore wishes to take advantage. > Carol responds to Bart: > Your point explains nicely why DD wouldn't want to *re*vaporize > Voldemort, as opposed to leaving him as vapor in PoA if he'd been > given that choice. And Jen's point about not being able to vaporize > Voldie without risking killing Harry, whom LV was possessing, is > another good reason for not vaporizing Voldie in the MoM that I > overlooked in my initial response to Annemehr. Jen: Proposing Dumbledore didn't kill Voldemort because he might kill Harry as well wasn't a reference to LV possessing Harry. I was suggesting Dumbledore didn't vaporize him because either he *couldn't* for reasons connected to the rebirthed body or DD thought he might inadventently kill Harry in the process (or both). My idea was the rebirth was the final piece of the self-fulfilling prophecy and possibly more evidence for Harry and Voldemort being tied together only by the 'curse that failed' and the events of the graveyard rather than the errant soul piece option. Why propose this? One big reason is because of how the MOM battle was handled in HBP...it wasn't! If Dumbledore's main reason for not attempting to kill Voldemort was the Horcruxes and Carol's logic in post #164807, then the MOM battle should have been wrapped up in the Horcrux chapter of HBP in my opinion. Dumbledore may not have known he was explaining everything to Harry for the last time but JKR did. A simple sentence would have closed the door on the MOM: 'You may wonder why I did not seek to kill Voldemort in the Ministry, Harry? I suspected Voldemort's Horcruxes made it impossible for him to die, that he would have returned to a vapor state once again. I believed that it was more important for the WW to know Voldemort had indeed returned rather than delaying the inevitable once again.' (You know, something to that effect .) Yes, Harry can come to this conclusion on his own but why would he need to if the question is already answered? JKR said this was one of *the* most important questions we could ask and since the MOM battle wasn't fully explained in HBP, and the gleam wasn't either, I believe there could be a connection. Jen R. From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Sat Feb 10 05:11:33 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:11:33 -0500 Subject: The intellect of Krum References: Message-ID: <009b01c74cd1$eefb7040$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164828 --zanooda wrote-- >>>Next, I assure you that nowhere in the book does Hermione comment on Krum's mental abilities (she says that he is not good-looking though :-)), nor does Moody/Crouch calls him a dolt, whatever it might be. In the movie she said that he watches her study and that he is a physical being or something of the sort, but not in the book. I hope you will read GoF and then maybe you will agree that Viktor Krum is a very unpretentious boy, who hides his insecurities and vulnerability behind his gloomy exterior. Just be objective and don't let the movie influence you: real Krum is not that very handsome (to my taste, at least), self-assured and self-satisfied sports superstar that you saw there :-).<<< --Ronin's Comments-- It is quite possible that I got both lines from the movie. Moody/Barty Jr., says "Krum may have a head full of sawdust, But Karkaroff does not". This is exactly why I will reserve any further comments on this subject until I've read the book again. I have read it once or twice mind you, but it's been quite a while now. Over a year. And I've seen the movie at least a dozen times since then. Also, I wasn't saying that I think Krum is stupid. Just that I found that he was portrayed that way in contrast to the Beauxbatons students. As I mentioned before, I feel that he had definite talents which could be beneficial to the cause or hurt the cause depending on the side he chooses. Half of my bloodline began in Poland. There are all sorts of stereotypes that people think of when they think of Poland. Most of them are false. (But I do admit that most of us are strong, stubbourn and quite handsome. lol) Anyway, I felt that JKR had kind of chosen to portray Krum and Durmstrang in a more negative way than she needed to. But that was my recent thought on the matter which may have been based on incorrect and corrupt information. I have gotten a replacement copy of GOF and will read it as soon as I finish this reading of HBP. One other quick comment which I may be mistaken about as well...In GOF, I remember the Beauxbaton's girls as being Veela. Which gave the impression of mythical beings with the power to charm people as if they exuded a sort of love potion pheromone. Yet, in the movie version and in HBP, they seem like nothing more than pretty French girls who only seem to effect Ron and occasionally, Harry. (In the movie, they aren't even referred to as Veela). Though it's somewhat comical, I find it is a huge inconsistency. But again, I have to read the book before I get into this. (I've allowed myself to be tempted and I shouldn't have) I hope I haven't gone over my 5 posts. I've gotten so caught up in all of the great discussions that I've found it easy to lose track. Cheers, Ronin From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Sat Feb 10 13:46:23 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 08:46:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Killing Curse and Horcruzes WAS:Back to The Plan References: <719771.54963.qm@web35001.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002f01c74d19$db445c40$e7c7f845@gatewayvplwy4j> No: HPFGUIDX 164829 --Deborah wrote-- SNIP >>>I maintain that what happened at Godric's Hollow was that the spell cast by Voldemort bounced off Harry as he was protected by his mother's sacrifice and that spell then hit Voldemort. It split Voldemort's soul and killed the bit of his soul within his body simultaneously. The bit of his soul that had been ripped off was what wandered off to the woods to later be discovered by Pettigrew. As it was not trapped within a horcrux, it was free to move, think, behave in the manner that Voldemort did. In the grand scheme of these books, what does this mean? The diary, the ring, possibly the locket (if it were destroyed by the mysterious RAB and if it were in fact a horcrux) and the bit that Voldemort killed himself have been obliviated. And of course, that there is no potential that Harry himself or his scar contain a bit of Voldemort's soul in a horcrux. I'm in the camp that Peter Pettigrew was there at Godric's Hollow,(who else could have given Voldemort his wand again?) and Peter blew up the Potter's residence, possibly to hide evidence and create confusion. My theory on Harry's scar is weak, even to me, but I contend that it was where Voldemort's very powerful spell cracked through and touched him. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- I think you've done a great job on this post. It's quite intriguing. Godric's Hollow, in my opinion, will play a very large role in the outcome of DH. In fact, I wonder if it isn't Godric's Hollow which is referred to by the title Deathly Hallows. It is a place where tragic deaths have occurred, obviously. But also, it is a place which takes it's name from one of the Hallowed founders of Hogwarts. So, why was it named so? What significance does this place hold in relation to Godric Gryffindor? The place has a meaning and a connection with both Harry and Lord Voldemort. I wonder if a horcrux wasn't created there, accidentally, when Harry survived the AK. Perhaps, it was created using the last bit of Lord Voldemort's soul and that is why he was destroyed. Pettigrew, witnessing everything from hiding, tried to erase any evidence and retrieving The Dark Lord's wand, covered the accidental horcrux as well. But somebody was coming and he didn't have time to kill Harry. (Or was afraid to try since Lord Voldemort was destroyed in his own failed attempt) This may be the greatest advantage Harry has over Lord Voldemort. With some research, Harry may deduce that there is some relic of Godric Gryffindor's at Godric's Hollow which may be a horcrux. And it's something that Lord Voldemort is unaware of. If all of the other horcruxes are destroyed, the final showdown could take place at Godric's Hollow where Harry will finally discover the accidental and final horcrux and destroy Lord Voldemort once and for all. Keeping in mind that this theory is somewhat off the cuff, I think it may be plausible and with some adjustments based on canon, could explain a lot. The confirmed and refuted rumors and comments on JKR's web site seem to back aspects of this theory up. She does mention Godric's Hollow being a key and gives someone recognition for finding the relation of Godric's Hollow to Godric Gryffindor. So, if anyone has any input on this I'd enjoy the discussion. Some people are still holding to the time-turner theory, but I don't particularly support the time-turner school of thought. Despite however well the rest of the theory is thought out, time turners were destroyed in the DoM. I also hope that the finale does not turn out to involve time-turners, since I thought it was really a cop-out in PoA to begin with. It's always bothered me that if Harry had died, he'd have never been around to go back in time later on. Somebody would've had to intervene anyway. Otherwise, anyone could simply return from the dead later on by using a time-turner. Anyway, welcome Deborah. I am also quite new to the group and find it a terrific place to discuss Harry Potter. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From logistis_20 at yahoo.gr Sat Feb 10 12:02:34 2007 From: logistis_20 at yahoo.gr (george_19.5 george) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 12:02:34 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: <17247637.1171044377611.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20070210120234.24998.qmail@web27302.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164830 Annemehr : >The inescapable conclusion is that DD *wants* LV to have a body these >days. It *has* to be part of the Plan -- that Plan that we *still* >don't know, and which inevitably entails the cost of the many >collateral deaths we read about in HBP. Bart: (Agreeing) With the horcruxes, Dumbledore could not have killed Voldemort. Therefore, there must be a key vulnerability in this particular body of which Dumbledore wishes to take advantage. George: It is easy to understand why. The soul itself can not be killed but inside a body is easier target. From rkelley at blazingisp.net Sat Feb 10 16:12:16 2007 From: rkelley at blazingisp.net (Rick & LeAnn Kelley) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 10:12:16 -0600 Subject: Krum's Intellect Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164831 I've always pictured Krum's character in my mind as one often stereotyped in American teenage movies - he plays the part of the "dumb jock". Those are the guys with few brains, but are given special treatment becase they are so good at their particular sports. The school grooms them because sports stars get more wins for the team, which brings in more fans who spend more money on tickets, and the school has more revenue. Their friends like being seen with them, too, basking in the fringes of their limelight. Everyone views them as assets, rather than people. In teen movies the character is usually portrayed either as a bully, or as the pathetic buddy who can't even finish his math homework without the help of an entire group of friends plus a girlfriend - er, hmm, that sounds like a couple of other guys we know. Harry's first impression of Krum was that he was apelike, with arms too long, and walking duckfooted. Krum's mispronunciation of Hermione's name and infatuation with her wasn't unlike that of Grawp's. Krum didn't have much resistance to the Imperius curse in the maze, either. However we also saw a different Krum at times. Once Krum got into the sky into his Quidditch game he was like epic poetry on a broomstick. He also showed signs of a sensitive nature when he complimented Harry on his flying, and when he was able to see past those people who wanted a piece of him only because of his fame. The fact that he zeroed in on Hermione who wasn't fawning all over him is, IMO, the greatest clue that Krum isn't dumb. Was Krum's social development arrested while his coach concentrated on training only his athletic ability, or he is just a late-bloomer from whom we will see more development? I think he definitely has potential and it will have a much better chance of developing now that Karkaroff has his thumb off of him. rkelley From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Feb 10 17:27:05 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 17:27:05 -0000 Subject: HeadMaster Snape & The Battle of Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164832 --- "Mike" wrote: > > --- "justcarol67" wrote: > > > > > "Steve" wrote: > > > > > > > Carol responds: > > I really like this idea, in part because it makes > > Snape highly visible and because it enables him to > > "slither out of action" of the murder-and-torture > > variety, which would be highly detrimental to > > DDM!Snape, and because it sets up an emotionally > > charged encounter between Snape and Harry. ... > > > > Mike: > I too like this idea of Steve's. Of course the open > question still remains will Hogwarts even open this > year? If McGonnagall becomes Headmistress - seems > likely - she was leaning towards not re-openning > at the end of HBP. > bboyminn: I would like to pose the question at this time, why would the school close? A question, which of course, I will also answer. I don't think it would be simply because the Headmaster was dead; they all die eventually. I think in the moment of the aftermath of Dumbledore's death, McGonagall contemplates whether any parents will feel that Hogwarts or anywhere else in the wizard world will be safe. She is not planning to close the school, but is wondering if enough students will return to warrant opening the school. The other teachers all say that even if only one student returns, they will be happy to teach that student. So McGonagall is concerned about enrollment. The teachers are determined to teach no matter how low the enrollment numbers are. That seems as though they are considering the possibility that the school could close, but are fighting for it to stay open. So, what could cause the school to close? Well, they might realize exactly what I and Voldemort have realized, that the school is the supreme strategic target. He who holds the students holds the wizard world. Note that if there are no students at Hogwarts, there really is no reason to capture it. Empty, the school is of virtually zero strategic advantage, and only an ever so slight psychological advantage. It would make the wizard world uneasy, but it wouldn't really exert any pressure on them. Keep in mind that the school is 1,000 years old, and to the best of our knowledge, hasn't closed down yet. It seems like the first Voldemort War was far more advanced and dangerous than the current one, and we don't hear of the school being closed down because of it. Of course, Dumbledore is gone now, and that is exactly what makes Hogwarts an appealing target. If the school is not open, it will be because the Board of Governors see the likelihood of an attack on Hogwarts as being too high to risk. And without students, there really isn't any point in attacking the school. Still, I can't help but think that in its many years of history Hogwarts hasn't closed down, I see no reason why they would now. I'd say it's about 50/50, but I'm leaning toward it being open since the whole series seems to be based around the Hogwarts school year; seven years, seven books. > ... Edited portrait comments that I agree with... > > > > Carol cont.: > > I considered the idea of Snape working with his > > seeming rival Bellatrix to engineer a DE escape from > > Azkaban, during or after which he would subvert > > Lucius Malfoy and a few others to rebel against > > Voldemort, but I like your idea even better because > > it recenters the action on Hogwarts. > > Mike: > Can't we have both?! I like this idea too, Carol. > Although, how about reuniting Lucius Malfoy with his > son - and having Lucius remain in Voldie's camp - it > could make for even more pressure on Draco and > produce an interesting dynamic if Draco is eventually > going to turn to the side of light. > > bboyminn: One of the greatest conflicts I see in the next book will be Snape's internal and external conflict. Certainly, Snape wants Draco to turn to the good side, but likely Draco feels he has already gone too far in his actions. Though I don't necessarily feel that is so, I think Draco can still convert to the side of good with minimal consequences. But how? How can Snape even approach that subject with Draco? Draco may see it as another opportunity to get on to Voldemort's good side. Perhaps, when Draco least expects it, Snape will use Legilimency to find out that Draco really wants out. In any event, I see Snape turning Draco to the good side as an extremely difficult task because it will have to occur under the watchful eye of the other (jealous) DE's and under Voldemort's watchful eye. Next, I just don't see how the next book can play out without Harry and Snape finding some way to work together, and by extension, Harry and Draco working together but that is another subject. Even if Snape is ESE! I think he will still try to convince Harry he is not, and if he is DDM! then he has an equally difficult task in convincing Harry. That is probably the part of the next book that I am most looking forward to, how will Snape and Harry make their peace? > > Steve: > > > attack at the Weasley Wedding, > > > > Carol: > > Nor do I think we'll see an attack on the Weasley > > wedding, which can easily be kept a secret .... > > Keep it quiet, all in the family. > > Mike: > Question: Isn't it traditional that the wedding is > held at or near the home and family of the bride? ... > It goes with tradition that this wedding would be in > France and it has a much better chance of being > unmarred if it is held there. > bboyminn: Fair point Mike, but I get the sense that the wedding is going to be at the Weasleys. Maybe that is an unfounded impression on my part, but that's how I read the book. Though on second thought, the Weasley's seems pretty small and cramped. Is there really enough room there for a wedding and reception even if it is all held outdoors - food for thought. Arthur actually has a relatively large family; several brothers. I assume a few of his coworkers will be there. Perhaps the Ministry will even see this as another chance to get in Harry's good graces. Plus all the people from France. That is a lot of very strategically important people all gathering in one place. That just seems like too easy a target to not hit it. It is also one of the reasons why it is unwise to have such a public wedding in times like this. Personally, I hope the wedding pulls off without a hitch, and Harry gets to meet the extended Weasley clan as well as the extent family of Fleur Delacore. But still it seems to great a psychological target for Voldemort to pass up. On the other hand, Voldemort's numbers of DE's is not that strong right now. A lot of them are in prison, though I certainly expect them to get out soon. Keep in mind there were convicted of Tresspassing, but were not, according to the Prophet, convicted of attempted murder, being DE's, or any of their greater crimes. None the less, they are there now. A few DE's were lost in the raid at Hogwarts. Perhaps Voldemort will decide that the small psychological gain of an attack on a wedding is not worth the risk of losing more DE's. Hopefully, he will concentrate on more long term and more critical targets. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 00:04:03 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 00:04:03 -0000 Subject: Krum's Intellect In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164833 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Rick & LeAnn Kelley" wrote: > Harry's first impression of Krum was that he was apelike, with arms > too long, and walking duckfooted. zanooda: The "duckfooted" part is correct, but "apelike" - no! JKR stresses Krum's resemblance to a bird, not an ape. Maybe she thinks that someone who flies so well should look like a bird :-). "Viktor Krum was thin, dark, and sallow-skinned, with a large curved nose and thick black eyebrows. He looked like an overgrown bird of prey" (GoF, p.105 US hardback). Krum is also round-shouldered and, as you rightly point out, slightly duck-footed. Harry notices that Krum is much less coordinated on the ground than in the air. As for "apelike", Marvolo Gaunt comes to mind. He has "overlong" arms and "the look of a powerful, aged monkey" ("The house of Gaunt"). Other "apelike" people - Crabbe, who has "long, gorilla arms", and Salazar Slytherin himself, who had a "monkeyish" face (if his statue is realistic, that is). Maybe one of these descriptions influenced the way you remember Krum's appearance :-). From catlady at wicca.net Sun Feb 11 01:38:26 2007 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 01:38:26 -0000 Subject: fajitas, "Crush", broomsticks, youngest House player in a century, Weasleys Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164834 Hey, Steve bboyminn, it's fajitas, not fRajitas, altho' R does seem to be the slipperiest letter, always falling in and out of words, and moving around inside them. (For example, the Online Etymology Dictionary says 'bird' was 'bridd' until the 15th century .) Ronin wrote in : << I also agree that Snape would crush Luscious Malfoy. I'd rather Harry, Ron or Hermione had at him though. >> Is that Snape has a 'crush' on Lucius Malfoy, or Snape will smash him into pulp? Is Lucius or Severus the 'him' you'd rather HRH would 'have at'? It has always seemed to me that young Severus was infatuated with Lucius (hero-worship, not necessarily something erotic*), and Lucius seduced the usefully talented boy into the Death Eaters, while Serverus took Lucius as the role model from whom he learned to make dramatic entrances, walk gracefully, and threaten in a silken whisper. I see DDM!Sevvie as very good at lying to himself, and therefore believing Lucius's claim of having been under Imperius, and only realized that Lucius was still on the Dark Side when Harry mentioned seeing him in the graveyard of GoF. Thus the 'almost imperceptible movement'. Such a Sevvie would be dedicated to redeeming Lucius rather than destroying him, unless it were necessary to destroy Lucius to save Draco (or Harry, which would *really* irritate Sevvie). ESE!Severus, on the other hand, would have been confident that Lucius was still on the Dark Side, and his reaction to hearing Harry mention Lucius would be fear of Lucius getting caught. DDM!Sevvie has the problem of how to convert Draco to the Light Side and ESE!Sevvie has the problem of how to toughen Draco into a useful killer. I prefer DDM!Sevvie because I don't like Dumbledore to have been so greatly deceived, but *cross fingers* JKR can make anything work. (* Altho' I personally do see it as erotic and therefore I oppose all Snape/Lily, Snape/Narcissa, and Snape/Regulus romances, and any Karkaroff/Snape before they were both Death Eaters. Altho' ever since GoF I have admitted that the plots are constructed in a way that appears to be leading up to LOLLIPOPS. Maybe JKR can make even that work.) bboyminn wrote in : << Pure speculation but I don't think McGonagall actually bought Harry a broom. Nor do I think she charged Harry's own vault for it. I think it is much more likely that the school bought a broom for Harry to use. That is, not only was the broom paid for with school funds but was technically considered school property. >> If Hogwarts bought a decent broom for each kid accepted to the varsity Quidditch team, then why didn't Ron borrow Harry's broom for try-outs? If he made the team, Hogwarts would buy him a broom, so it wouldn't matter that all the brooms he could borrow were already being used by the team (Harry's, Fred's, George's). Instead, Ron didn't bother with try-outs until he had a decent broom of his own. Surely that was because, no matter how well he did on the try-outs, he couldn't be accepted to the team without a broom. I don't like this fact, because I did like the theory that Hogwarts did buy the first team broom for each kid. If Hogwarts didn't buy a decent broom for each new team member but did buy one for Harry, that is just as special treatment as if McGonagall or Dumbledore bought it with their personal savings. (I feel that DD, still working at 150, has *lots* of savings.) Carol wrote in : << Harry is the youngest Quidditch player in a century >> Harry is one of the youngest first-years, having turned 11 only one month before start of term. If there was a player as young as him only a century ago, that suggests that there was a first-year player as often as every 20 or 25 years. In wizarding time, that's not such a *rare* exception. Steve bboyminn wrote in : << Arthur actually has a relatively large family; several brothers. >> JKR stated: "Arthur Weasley was one of three brothers. Ginny (full name Ginevra, not Virginia), is the first girl to be born into the Weasley clan for several generations." So Arthur only had two siblings. I believe that one of them was Ron's Uncle Bilius, who died after seeing a Grim, and after whom Bill's first name and Ron's middle named were named. If the other was named Ronald, could the three of them have been R.A.B? The Malfoy statement about "all the Weasleys have red hair, freckles, and more children than they can afford" sounds to me like it refers to people with more than three children. Arthur has more than three children, but his father didn't. "All the Weasleys" could mean Arthur and his brothers, but we haven't encountered any Weasley cousins yet. Even the rumored Mafalda was Mrs Weasley's accountant second cousin's daughter rather than a Weasley. By the way, there's no evidence of Molly have any siblings besides the last Fabian and Gideon. From cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com Sun Feb 11 00:32:37 2007 From: cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com (Unspeakable) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 00:32:37 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164835 Very interesting points, wynleaf (and Magpie and Carol)! I duly note that Hermione never failed with Snape's instructions (he had the book!) - also that Snape takes his teaching seriously & that Lupin praises Snape's skill with the Wolfsbane Potion. (Incidentally, I never doubted that it was Snape's *handwriting* inside that textbook.) You are right, also, to point out the revisions and crossings out ... I guess Potions geniuses are made as well as born! Indeed, I am becoming increasingly convinced that Severus Snape & Lily Evans were (more or less) equal partners in Potions; though, if pushed, I think I would still give Miss Evans the advantage. (Sorry!) My reasoning is, (apart from Slughorn's exaggerated praise) that Apart from Slughorn's extravagant praise ("One of the brightest I ever taught", "intuitive grasp of potion-making"), I would suggest that Snape *respected* Lily (hence his curious reluctance to abuse her to Harry), which leads me to think (Snape being Snape!) that she must have been at least as talented as him. He doesn't seem the type to have conceded anything to a Muggle-born girl without such proof of her abilities; nor does *she* seem the type (based on what we saw of her integrity in 'Snape's Worst Enemy') to have cribbed from him, effectively stolen his reputation (& place in the Slug Club?) only to ditch him for Quidditch hero, James Potter. For Slughorn, at least, Lily's physical attractiveness was part of her charm, but she was not just a pretty face, IMHO; nor should Slughorn's obvious flaws detract from the fact that he is a shrewd judge of potential high-fliers (as even Dumbledore allowed). And the fact that he has (despite vigorous protestations to the contrary!) a residual blood prejudice, means that Muggle-born students have to work even harder to impress, I would think. In any case, I like the idea that Lily & Snape collaborated in NEWT level Potions, without the Marauders ? (neither James nor Sirius possessed the requisite subtly to qualify, IMHO, though I am not sure about Lupin!) - even more than the idea that *he* was secretly obsessed with her brilliance, noting down everything she did (which seemed to fit with an 'unrequited love' hypothesis, as well as the fact that we are pointedly reminded in HBP how difficult it is to keep your Potions work secret!) I would not want to detract from Snape's creativity as an inventor of jinxes ... but could it be significant that from the very beginning of PS/SS, we learn that Snape's natural inclination is for *DADA*? (And when Snape declares himself at the end of Book 6, it is to claim ownership of a *spell*.) I would have to disagree with you on the (lack of) useful implications of the Lily!Genius theory ? I think there are several. a) The lesson that Harry learns about Dark Magic in HBP still stands (if we accept that Snape was the creator of the jinxes). However, it seems to me that the main function of the Half-Blood Prince's textbook in Book 6 is that of a brilliantly clever *red herring*. In Harry's mind, the issue of the book's authorship becomes inextricably linked with that of Snape's allegiance, until he is completely unable to separate the two (or see that they are in fact entirely *unrelated*) ... so that Snape's revelation (after killing Dumbledore) that he is 'the Half-Blood Prince' sounds almost like an open declaration of evil. In a spectacular piece of false logic, Harry simultaneously convinces himself that the book's "evil" is proof of Snape's guilt & that Snape's guilt is proof of the book's "evil". IMHO, Harry's circular reasoning is proof of his own guilt ... he knows that he was wrong to ignore Hermione's warnings ('in spite of the increasing nastiness of those scribbled spells, he had refused to believe ill of the boy who had been so clever, who had helped him so much') so convinces himself that this is analogous with Dumbledore's apparently 'inexcusable trust in Snape'. (Something that might have brought Harry & Snape together, leaves them even further apart: 'Helped him ... it was an almost unendurable thought, now ...'.) Interestingly, Hermione herself takes a more reasoned view: "I thought the Prince seemed to have a nasty sense of humour, but I would never have guessed he was a potential killer ...". (In that case, she needs to ask *why* Snape didn't simply ask for his book back ... if Dumbledore knowingly employed Snape as former DE, he would hardly have been worried about a few bad spells in Snape's old textbook!) Now, none of this is adversely affected by Lily!Genius helping with the Potions improvements, IMHO ... in fact, if Harry needs to *unlearn* a lot of what he learned in HBP, then the revelation that Snape and his mother might have worked together would be a good place to start. b) But isn't the moral of the story that Harry shouldn't *underestimate* Snape, (not that he shouldn't trust Snape)? After all, Harry was too ready to believe that the Prince was his father and to assert that (Snape?!) had taught him more than Snape. If so, then I suppose, Lily!Genius would detract from the moral ... although frankly I don't want Snape to be vindicated as a good *Potions* teacher (even despite his Bezoar tip). :-) His bullying approach has hardly helped Harry to perform in the subject, based on the evidence we've seen. And Harry has never underestimated Snape's *power*, IMHO, especially since finding out that Snape is a double/triple agent. Plus, he now knows that Snape armed the DEs with a lot of important jinxes. (Importantly, thanks to the textbook, Harry also knows the counter-jinxes. And I think it is worth noting (in Snape's favour) that he effectively provided Harry with the advanced DADA tuition, he was hoping for from Dumbledore!) But if Harry has ever really underestimated someone, it is his mother, IMHO. (Hermione has a point about casual sexism!) Naturally enough, Harry has always identified with his father. Despite honouring his mother's sacrifice, he showed little interest in Lily's personality & accomplishments (even after meeting Slughorn), though it strikes me that she is potentially more significant for his future. (It might not help psychologically that Petunia is his mother's relative?) Personally, I would like Lily!Genius to have been Harry's hidden helper if only to prove to him that his mother's talent (for Charms & Potions) was as great as his father's (for Quidditch & Transfiguration). And yes, I think ? though acknowledging the lack of evidence in this case ? that Lily was an Unspeakable who worked in the DOM. (Evidence? It was highly secret, you know!) :-) c) Furthermore, I think the textbook could yet be significant as a prop in the Lily/Snape story. (I wonder if Petunia ever saw him with it? I cherish the belief that Snape might have known Lily & Petunia as neighbours in the Muggle world.) We have so little to connect the pair of them, yet JKR has never debunked this enduringly popular theory, which (until OOtP) rested only on Snape's anguish in POA and his silence (interpreted, rightly I suspect, as respect for her memory). Then, in OOtP came the moment when Lily defended Snape and he spurned her ? His Worst Memory? But it wasn't until HBP that we learned (intriguingly) that Snape & Lily had a talent in common. I would love to believe that the Prince's textbook, which Harry supposedly acquired by accident, turns out to have significance for *him* - as a legacy of his mother, acquired through Snape. Cassy, who romantically sees Snape's career in Potions as a tribute to Lily. http://book7.co.uk/ From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 08:02:24 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 08:02:24 -0000 Subject: It's more complex than that.... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164836 In a recent interview in the 'Guardian - Observer', Dan Racliffe has given a very nice interview. In the interview, he speaks of JKR visiting the set of the movie to take a break from her writing. Dirty Harry http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,,2008889,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=1 Here is a quote - "But honestly, he (Dan) says, he has no idea of how the series will end. Nor does he want to. He's a Potter fan, like everyone else. 'Jo came down to the set at one point and I said, "Oh hello, why are you here today?" And she said, "Oh I just needed a break from the book - Dumbledore's giving me a lot of trouble." And I (Dan) said, "But isn't he dead?" And she said, "Well, yeah, but it's more complex ..." I was like, [briskly] "OK, I'm not gonna ask anything else!"" "Dumbledore is giving me a lot of trouble". I don't think for a minute that this means that Dumbledore is not dead. I'm sure he is quite dead, but I always expected him to be in the last book even if he is dead. Harry's parents are dead and they have made several appearances in the Series. We already know that Dumbledore has one enduring presence in the remaining book; his portrait. That will be something. I just can't imagine Dumbledore's portrait being there and Harry not talking to it a time or two. In addition, I suspect there are penseive memories and perhaps some letters. So, that represents Dumbledore's presence in the book. In some way the wise old now-dead mentor alwasy finds a way to make his presence felt, but that doesn't mean he will be jumping out from behind the curtain saying "Just kidding". So, as naturally assumed by me, and as vaguely confirmed by JKR, Dumbledore will have some role to play in the final book. I'm looking forward to it. Just passing it along. (also, it 2am, I'm probable the first to read the article and make the inevitable comment) Steve/bboyminn From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Feb 11 12:58:17 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:58:17 -0000 Subject: It's more complex than that.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164837 Steve/bboyminn: > "Dumbledore is giving me a lot of trouble". I don't think for a minute that this means that Dumbledore is not dead. I'm sure he is quite dead, but I always expected him to be in the last book even if he is dead. Harry's parents are dead and they have made several appearances in the Series. *(snip)* > In some way the wise old now-dead mentor alwasy finds a way to make his presence felt, but that doesn't mean he will be jumping out from behind the curtain saying "Just kidding". Ceridwen: Maybe he'll jump out from behind the curtain and say 'Phoenix, you know, back from Beyond'. ;) Or just show up drinking tea in the Weasleys' kitchen. Or, maybe (ominous music) this is proof of ESE!Dumbledore: he even gives his Creatrix trouble by refusing to stay dead. Good catch, Steve! I'm up for hearing anyone's take on this. I doubt Pensieve memories because, in my opinion, leaving something like that or a letter lying around is just begging for the Bad Guys to find it. We don't know how much a portrait could recall from its subject's life, so that's hit or miss (but I'm sure JKR can pull it off). Spirit presence like the Priori Incantatum (that was the GoF effect, wasn't it?) or like Obi-Wan Kenobi is possible, but perhaps a bit cheesy and 'been there, done that'. And, there's always a Harry-absent chapter or two that might explain things... July is such a long way off! Ceridwen. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Feb 11 15:32:59 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 15:32:59 -0000 Subject: It's more complex than that.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164838 > Steve/bboyminn: > "Dumbledore is giving me a lot of trouble". I don't think for a > minute that this means that Dumbledore is not dead. I'm sure he is > quite dead, but I always expected him to be in the last book even > if he is dead. Harry's parents are dead and they have made several > appearances in the Series. > *(snip)* > In some way the wise old now-dead mentor alwasy finds a way to > make his presence felt, but that doesn't mean he will be jumping > out from behind the curtain saying "Just kidding". > Ceridwen: > Maybe he'll jump out from behind the curtain and say 'Phoenix, you > know, back from Beyond'. ;) Jen: Hehe, like that one. I do expect the phoenix imagery to mean something about the way Dumbledore died, that yes he's physically dead but not completely behind the Veil or he can cross back and forth. Not a ghost in that sense because he has no fear of death and they can't get behind the Veil. The information from Nick may be in there for Harry/Sirius, but also to distinguish how people become ghosts so Dumbledore can explain why he's not one. Ceridwen: > Spirit presence like the Priori Incantatum (that was the GoF > effect, wasn't it?) or like Obi-Wan Kenobi is possible, but perhaps > a bit cheesy and 'been there, done that'. Jen: Yeah, it's been done. It's so useful though! And JKR will have some fascinating explanation for why Dumbledore was the first to achieve this ancient magic. If not that option, there could be a time-travel feature on Ron's watch and Dumbledore might be safe to contact, the Trio could be seen by him without a negative impact on the time/space continuum because Dumbledore will wisely recognize they are from the future. Ceridwen: > Good catch, Steve! I'm up for hearing anyone's take on this. I > doubt Pensieve memories because, in my opinion, leaving something > like that or a letter lying around is just begging for the Bad Guys > to find it. Jen: There is one safe place for a letter and many people have speculated that Petunia still has Dumbledore's original missive under the creaky stair. It's not safe for *long* granted, but long enough for Petunia to have a change of heart and let Harry read it. But a letter....that's not enough of a presence even though this idea is on my list of 'really hope it proves true' in DH. Another thought: Aberforth's memories would be safer for learning historical infomation. Ceridwen: > We don't know how much a portrait could recall from its subject's > life, so that's hit or miss (but I'm sure JKR can pull it off). Jen: I'm not big on the portrait, it does seem limited and technically the headmaster portrait serves the head. So there's a conflict of interest there since McGonagall has all kinds of questions, too. That could be fun, will the Dumbledore portrait require reigning in from the others if he doesn't want to tell McGonagall information or instead helps Harry?!? All in all the portrait doesn't seem the best way for Harry to learn information, or maybe not the *primary* way. Jen, knowing JKR's imagination far surpasses her own and she'll find a way. ;-) From bartl at sprynet.com Sun Feb 11 17:26:04 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:26:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The intellect of Krum In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45CF51AC.2050308@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164839 Geoff Bannister wrote: Geoff: > Being from the UK helps. Many years ago, there was a very funny actress > who appeared regularly on the radio called Hermione Gingold and was a > leading character in the film "Gigi". Yes, she's the actress I was mentioning earlier. Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Sun Feb 11 17:54:14 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:54:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin (was Re: Father Figures In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45CF5846.5070604@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164840 va32h wrote: > I had never thought of that! I suppose it will be hard for Snape to > convince Harry that he was working for DD without some support. Bart: It makes a lot of sense, however. Something that was discovered by stage magicians in the 20th century is that, in the context of a play, one way of coming up with REALLY amazing feats is to make the character who is supposed to be your adversary your confederate. JKR has already done this, by maneuvering one of the people trying to hide Sirius the man in charge of finding him. Bart From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 17:53:43 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 17:53:43 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164841 Ceridwen wrote: > Good catch, Steve! I'm up for hearing anyone's take on this. I > doubt Pensieve memories because, in my opinion, leaving something > like that or a letter lying around is just begging for the Bad Guys > to find it. We don't know how much a portrait could recall from its > subject's life, so that's hit or miss (but I'm sure JKR can pull it > off). Spirit presence like the Priori Incantatum (that was the GoF > effect, wasn't it?) or like Obi-Wan Kenobi is possible, but perhaps a > bit cheesy and 'been there, done that'. > > And, there's always a Harry-absent chapter or two that might explain > things... Carol responds: But a Harry-absent chapter wouldn't be the way to deal with Dumbledore, would it? (Snape and Draco, maybe.) As for Pensieve memories lying around, they're not kept in a Pensieve, and I'm quite sure DD made sure that all the Pensieve memories were back in his head or their labeled vials (they have to be labeled, or he wouldn't know Hokey's from Bob Ogden's) before he made the trip to the cave. I half-expect DD to have willed Harry the Pensieve and some bottled memories ("If I could put Time in a bottle. . . ," hint to CMC) that he hasn't yet seen, preferably of DD and Snape. There's Portrait!Dumbledore, who, unfortunately, may be of limited use, and maybe some first-person narrative by Aberforth about his and Albus's youth. I used to think that Priori Incantatem on Snape's wand (it couldn't be just Prior Incantato for a single spell, as he's already performed all those spell deflections by the end of HBP) would be a way to get to the memory of DD and have him recount the details of his own death, with Harry as witness, but that would be hard to arrange. And a Dumbledore Patronus, if a person could be a Patronus, wouldn't speak. I suppose there's Dumbledore beyond the Veil if Harry makes the mythic journey to the Underworld and back (foreshadowed in many of the books, from SS/PS's third-floor corridor, where HRH fall down many floors to a passage beneath the castle, and CoS's Chamber of Secrets to HBP's cave). I suspect that Harry will encounter Dead!Dumbledore as well as the spirits of his parents, and Sirius Black still in his body but dead and unable to return. (Harry, I predict, will take Sirius's body back, foreshadowed be taking Cedric's body back in GoF.) BTW, another article on Leaky recently seems to suggest that Harry will be attending Hogwarts for his seventh year despite indications to the contrary at the end of HBP. In an excerpt from an old interview, JKR says in part: "He [Harry]'s going to be at Hogwarts for seven years. In the seventh book he'll turn 17. In my wizarding world, you come of age at 17. So in book seven he'll be allowed to use magic outside school." http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/#article:9483 Carol, who will miss Hogwarts as a "character" in the books and hopes he'll spend most of the year there (and besides, the Hallows, whatever they are, are probably at Hogwarts) From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Feb 11 17:56:37 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 11 Feb 2007 17:56:37 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 2/11/2007, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1171216597.10.45187.m36@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164842 Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday February 11, 2007 1:00 pm - 1:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Location: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Notes: Just a reminder, Sunday chat starts in about one hour. To get to the HPfGU room follow this link: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Create a user name for yourself, whatever you want to be called. Enter the password: hpfguchat Click "Join Chat" on the lower right. Chat start times: 11 am Pacific US 12 noon Mountain US 1 pm Central US 2 pm Eastern US 7 pm UK All Rights Reserved Copyright 2007 Yahoo! Inc. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 18:08:55 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:08:55 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164843 > Carol responds: I suspect that Harry will encounter Dead!Dumbledore as well as > the spirits of his parents, and Sirius Black still in his body but > dead and unable to return. (Harry, I predict, will take Sirius's body > back, foreshadowed be taking Cedric's body back in GoF.) > Alla: I had seen you making this prediction in the past and still cannot figure out what narrative purpose for the story that would serve. Now, let's obviously get out of the way my wish for Harry bringing Sirius back alive, that is not likely to happen at all, but I do not see why Harry would take Sirius body back if he is properly dead and cannot return. Situation with Cedric was a lot different, no? In a sense that his body was not beyond the veil or whenever it is supposed to be, but in the world of living. If Harry meets Sirius in the underworld and Sirius is properly dead ( as I said I am still wishing for the opposite, but I realise that this is not realistic), would it not make more sense for Sirius to stay there? To help Harry with advise, etc, and stay there, since he is already in there and symbolism of burying his body would be meaningless IMO of course, since for all intents and purposes his body is already there. That is just of course my opinion, but Harry bringing Sirius body back from where it is already belongs, would feel like mockery to me. I think that if Harry goes to Underworld, he will certainly meet his loved ones, but they will stay there and Harry would find some other way to get back, although I certainly would not mind Steve's variation of this one - namely Sirius being able to come back alive, heheh. JMO, Alla, bookmarking this post for post book 7 prediction comparisons ;) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 19:06:26 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 19:06:26 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164844 Cassy wrote: > Very interesting points, wynleaf (and Magpie and Carol)! > > I duly note that Hermione never failed with Snape's instructions (he had the book!) - also that Snape takes his teaching seriously & that Lupin praises Snape's skill with the Wolfsbane Potion. (Incidentally, I never doubted that it was Snape's *handwriting* inside that > textbook.) You are right, also, to point out the revisions and > crossings out ... I guess Potions geniuses are made as well as born! Carol: I'm not sure how you arrive at this conclusion. Are you taking slughorn's comments about Lily's natural Potions ability to indicate that Severus's genius wasn't equally natural? We know that he was a DADA genius (coming to school knowing more hexes than most seventh years) and you concede that he was a Potions genius as an adult (the Wolfbane Potion, etc.). The crossings out, which apply to the spells as well as the Potions hints, indicate that he *experimented* to achieve his results. Why would experimentation not be natural genius? Thomas Edison experimented to achieve his results. So did Watson and Crick, the discoverers of DNA. And genius need not be confined to one field. Cassy: > Apart from Slughorn's extravagant praise ("One of the brightest I ever taught", "intuitive grasp of potion-making"), I would suggest that Snape *respected* Lily (hence his curious reluctance to abuse her to Harry), which leads me to think (Snape being Snape!) that she must have been at least as talented as him. Carol: You're leaping from Slughorn's "extravagant praise," which could be valid but which we have no solid evidence to justify, to Severus's reaction to Lily, for which there is even less evidence. Look at Snape in his classroom, from his "shimmering cauldron" speech to his comments to his students (he always knows exactly which step or steps they've gotten wrong to produce those particular results). And as I noted earlier, he has his (improved) Potions directions memorized and writes them on the board with a flick of his wand. (Unlike Slughorn, he never tells the students to follow the directions out of the book.) It's highly unlikely that such intensive knowledge is acquired from Lily. It appears to be a combination of natural ability and intensive study. (No doubt some of the books that line his walls in Spinner's End are Potions books.) Cassy: > In any case, I like the idea that Lily & Snape collaborated in NEWT level Potions, without the Marauders ? (neither James nor Sirius possessed the requisite subtly to qualify, IMHO, though I am not sure about Lupin!) Carol: Slughorn requires only an E, not an O, for his NEWT Potions students, so it's quite likely that MWPP, or at least James and Sirius, were in his NEWT Potions class along with Severus and Lily. PP is no slouch at Potions, as well, given his performance in resurrecting Voldemort, including Fetal!mort. (Lupin claims that he was never good at Potions, so perhaps he wasn't in the class. Still, he might have scraped an E. Impossible to say.) Cassy: I would not want to detract from Snape's creativity as an inventor of jinxes ... but could it be significant that from the very beginning of PS/SS, we learn that Snape's natural inclination is for *DADA*? (And when Snape declares himself at the end of Book 6, it is to claim ownership of a *spell*.) Carol: He also seems to know quite well where Harry is getting his sudden high marks in Potions, and it's not from Lily's genes. (BTW, how does Slughorn, who must be eighty-something to have taught Tom Riddle and either a Half-Blood or a Pureblood given his attitude toward Muggleborns, know about a Muggle concept like genes?) Cassy: > b) But isn't the moral of the story that Harry shouldn't *underestimate* Snape, (not that he shouldn't trust Snape)? Carol: If so, how does crediting *Lily* with Severus's Potions improvements help to improve Harry's estimation of Snape's abilities? I'm not following you here. In any case, he's never doubted Snape's Potions abilities. Cassy: > I don't want Snape to be vindicated as a good *Potions* teacher (even despite his Bezoar tip). :-) His bullying approach has hardly helped Harry to perform in the subject, based on the evidence we've seen. Carol: But there's a difference between Snape's teaching methods, which are highly effective for the eight students who got O's on their Potions OWLS (Hermione, Draco, Pansy, Blaise Zabini, Theo Nott, Ernie Macmillan, and two Ravenclaws) if not for Ron and Harry, neither of whom makes much effort in Snape's class, or Neville, who's afraid of him, and Snape's knowledge of potion-making, which is demonstrated in every book. (It's implied that he makes the Mandrake Restorative Potion in CoS and DD relies on him for Wolfbane Potion and Veritaserum in other books. And note the curtains of liquid fire, each requiring a different antidote to allow the drinker to walk through them, in SS/PS. "Bottle fame, brew glory, even put a stopper in death" is no empty boast. Cassy: > But if Harry has ever really underestimated someone, it is his mother, IMHO. Carol: Very true. I think, for example, that Lily (whose first wand was "a nice wand for Charm work") must have placed the Fidelius Charm on Peter, and she may have been an Unspeakable, as some posters have suggested. But to give her credit for Snape's brilliance in Potions after five books demonstrating his brilliance in the subject (he takes only the very best in his NEWT Potions class, but takes a more democratic approach to DADA, which is not an elite subject but a necessary self-defense course for all students) is to take away all the beautiful irony of Harry's learning Potions from Snape without knowing he's Snape and identifying with the young Severus without knowing who he was. If you want to believe in a Snape/Lily connection, fine. But let's not give Lily credit for the brilliance Snape has demonstrated as Potions Master from "The Potions Master" chapter onward. Carol, who doesn't think that Lily made that snarky comment about stuffing Bezoars down "his" throat any more than she invented Sectumsempra From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 19:17:39 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 19:17:39 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164845 > Cassy: > > But if Harry has ever really underestimated someone, it is his > mother, IMHO. > > Carol: > Very true. I think, for example, that Lily (whose first wand was "a > nice wand for Charm work") must have placed the Fidelius Charm on > Peter, and she may have been an Unspeakable, as some posters have > suggested. But to give her credit for Snape's brilliance in Potions > after five books demonstrating his brilliance in the subject (he takes > only the very best in his NEWT Potions class, but takes a more > democratic approach to DADA, which is not an elite subject but a > necessary self-defense course for all students) is to take away all > the beautiful irony of Harry's learning Potions from Snape without > knowing he's Snape and identifying with the young Severus without > knowing who he was. > > If you want to believe in a Snape/Lily connection, fine. But let's not > give Lily credit for the brilliance Snape has demonstrated as Potions > Master from "The Potions Master" chapter onward. > > Carol, who doesn't think that Lily made that snarky comment about > stuffing Bezoars down "his" throat any more than she invented Sectumsempra > Alla: Heee, you see Ceridwen, I knew there would be a right place to post what I was telling you yesterday. So, yeah, jumping in. I am not giving Lily Snape's brilliance in Potions - I am giving her her **own** brilliance in Potions and do not believe that it is taking from Snape's brilliance in Potions at all. Can't they be both talented? Or does Snape holds the title of the **only** genuis in Potions in Hogwarts? I personally do not think so, but I can be wrong of course. Slughorn praise of her is enough for me to believe that Lily was very talented at least, whether the notes in the book are hers or not. Now, about that taking away the irony that Harry identified with young Snape, if Lily wrote those. Absolutely, it will take away the irony, but who says that JKR is not going for that? It all depends on what one is banking would be the crucial emotional connection that would help Harry to win the final battle. If one thinks that the crucial connection would be Harry/Snape, then sure notes in the book have to be Snape's to make sure that Harry had at least one point when he sympathised with young Snape, etc,etc,etc. But if one hopes ( as I sure do) that crucial connection would not be Harry/Snape, but Harry/Lily, that Snape is a plot device big one, but plot device nevertheless, designed to teach Harry what kind of person he should not be, the forgiveness, etc. Then I do not see why as Cassie mentioned earlier notes supposedly belonging to Snape cannot be one giant red herring and the book will really tell Harry more about Lily, then of Snape. Alla, thinks that Lily making those notes would have a layer of new and delightful irony. From deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 17:53:27 2007 From: deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com (Deborah Krupp) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 09:53:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: The intellect of Krum In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <369417.29198.qm@web35009.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164846 zanooda: I think that Krum's inability to pronounce Hermione's name correctly is partly caused by the lack of practice. You remember (or maybe not :-)) that he only pronounced "Herm-own-ninny" once, and Hermione was immediately satisfied, saying it was "close enough". She never tried to correct him again, I guess, because she didn't care much how he called her, or maybe it amused her (it sounds cute, doesn't it?). deborah: I think a large part of this scene was just Jo being tired of answering the question of the proper way to pronounce "Hermione". I found his mispronunciation comical, particularly as I could imagine Jo smiling as she wrote this bit of GoF and never thought it was indicative of Krum's intellect or character. from J.K. Rowling official website: Section: F.A.Q. How do you pronounce 'Hermione?' Her (as in 'her brain is bigger than everyone else's') + my (as in 'my brain isn't as big as that') + oh (as in 'oh, for a brain that size') + knee (as in 'I've bruised my knee'). This used to be the most frequently asked question of all, but it has become less so since I cunningly had Hermione tell Krum how to pronounce her name in 'Goblet of Fire'. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 19:50:17 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 19:50:17 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164847 Carol earlier: > > I suspect that Harry will encounter Dead!Dumbledore as well as the spirits of his parents, and Sirius Black still in his body but dead and unable to return. (Harry, I predict, will take Sirius's body back, foreshadowed be taking Cedric's body back in GoF.) > > > > Alla: > > I had seen you making this prediction in the past and still cannot > figure out what narrative purpose for the story that would serve. Carol responds: The point would be to give Sirius Black the proper funeral he never received and to give Harry a chance to accept his godfather's death as he accepts Dumbledore's. It would also provide a chance for the WW to be told Black's real story. I don't think the MoM ever publicly acknowledged its blunder regarding him. To use a jargon term that I hate, bringing Sirius's body back would give his story "closure." With regard to the main plot, if one of Harry's Voldie-acquired powers is possession, and his method of killing Voldemort is to force him through the Veil using Love as his weapon, possessing Sirius's body would provide Harry's soul with a means of transportation back to the WW. (Voldie's own fractured soul would remain behind with his body. He, like Sirius Black, would be truly dead. But Harry's soul would only be, so to speak, along for the ride, and he, unlike the others, could return.) I like this version of events because it gives Sirius Black's death a purpose beyond a lesson in compassion for Harry (understanding the suffering that others have endured because of Voldemort)by providing a means for Harry to go beyond the Veil and return alive, and it enables Harry to destroy Voldemort through a sacrificial impulse without dying himself or committing murder. Carol, hoping that explains why I keep returning to this idea and why I genuinely hope that I'm right From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 20:03:27 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 20:03:27 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164848 > Carol responds: > The point would be to give Sirius Black the proper funeral he never > received and to give Harry a chance to accept his godfather's death as > he accepts Dumbledore's. It would also provide a chance for the WW to > be told Black's real story. I don't think the MoM ever publicly > acknowledged its blunder regarding him. To use a jargon term that I > hate, bringing Sirius's body back would give his story "closure." Alla: Thanks. I guess what I do not get is how bringing the body of the person who is already behind the veil would bring the story closure. I think the only closure which is important IMO of course is Harry's closure and I think, again IMO that Harry can get his closure by talking and saying good buy to Sirius when he is there and leave Sirius left in peace. For some reason, and I am sure you did not mean it that way, but this is how it feels to me, if Harry brings Sirius body back, it would feel to me as if diggging his grave. I would hate that. Carol: > With regard to the main plot, if one of Harry's Voldie-acquired powers > is possession, and his method of killing Voldemort is to force him > through the Veil using Love as his weapon, possessing Sirius's body > would provide Harry's soul with a means of transportation back to the > WW. (Voldie's own fractured soul would remain behind with his body. > He, like Sirius Black, would be truly dead. But Harry's soul would > only be, so to speak, along for the ride, and he, unlike the others, > could return.) > Alla: But why Harry would not be able to find another way back? From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Feb 11 20:00:20 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 15:00:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook References: Message-ID: <004301c74e17$46251c40$4580400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164849 > Alla: > > Heee, you see Ceridwen, I knew there would be a right place to post > what I was telling you yesterday. > > So, yeah, jumping in. I am not giving Lily Snape's brilliance in > Potions - I am giving her her **own** brilliance in Potions and do > not believe that it is taking from Snape's brilliance in Potions at > all. Can't they be both talented? Or does Snape holds the title of > the **only** genuis in Potions in Hogwarts? I personally do not > think so, but I can be wrong of course. > > Slughorn praise of her is enough for me to believe that Lily was > very talented at least, whether the notes in the book are hers or > not. > > Now, about that taking away the irony that Harry identified with > young Snape, if Lily wrote those. > > Absolutely, it will take away the irony, but who says that JKR is > not going for that? Magpie: I think that Slughorn was perfectly serious when he said that Lily was good at Potions, and that this could be a connection she had to Snape. Snape could have admired Lily's Potions skill too. What I don't see any evidence for is the leap that Slughorn says Lily was good at Potions means that Lily must be person good at Potions Harry learned from in HBP. That, to me, seems like an odd leap, and one that leads nowhere. Harry already knows Lily was good at Potions and has already been offered a bond with himself via that fact through Slughorn (who keeps chalking up Harry's own brilliance to that and reminding him how he has Lily's eyes and her cheek etc.). It just doesn't interest in much. Which doesn't mean that Lily can't be connected to the book. I mean, Harry's relationship with Lily has potential, but it's not yet in any way complicated. Harry thinks Lily's great and learning she was good at Potions and helped him at Potions doesn't really give him anything except that hey, Mum was good at Potions. People have talked about Harry learning that James was good at Transfigurations, but Harry had no interest in that whatsoever. He didn't care that James got good marks from McGonagall-and I doubt he'd think it was interesting that Lily happened to be the one to cast the Fidelius charm if she did. (He doesn't really care that James was good at Quidditch either, except in a mild way.) What Harry cared about was what James did in more interesting ways with interesting people--that he Transfigured into an Animagus Stag to run with a werewolf that was his friend along with Sirius and Peter. Likewise, Lily's being good at Potions isn't interesting in itself. Her being the "brain" behind some of the HBP's Potions ideas isn't interesting in itself either--Harry wasn't impressed by the Prince's skill at Potions, he bonded with his personality and the way he "helped" Harry cheat. What is interesting is if there was a relationship that effects Harry--like a relationships with the HBP. Alla: > It all depends on what one is banking would be the crucial emotional > connection that would help Harry to win the final battle. > > If one thinks that the crucial connection would be Harry/Snape, then > sure notes in the book have to be Snape's to make sure that Harry > had at least one point when he sympathised with young Snape, > etc,etc,etc. > > But if one hopes ( as I sure do) that crucial connection would not > be Harry/Snape, but Harry/Lily, that Snape is a plot device big one, > but plot device nevertheless, designed to teach Harry what kind of > person he should not be, the forgiveness, etc. Magpie: Right. Harry and Lily don't need to "get to know each other" the way Harry got to know Snape through the book. It would mean something if Harry learned something from Lily that applied to his own emotional life. For instance, if Lily had a relationship with Snape that we'll learn about later (one for which the groundwork might have been laid in HBP via their shared Potions skill) that would mean something to Harry. That's a place where he can get to know Lily in a way that matters, and maybe model his behavior on her. The turnaround of the personality of the HBP being Snape depended on the personality of Snape that Harry already knew and despised. Alla: Then I do not see why > as Cassie mentioned earlier notes supposedly belonging to Snape > cannot be one giant red herring and the book will really tell Harry > more about Lily, then of Snape. Magpie: But what does it tell Harry about Lily if those notes were hers? That she was snarky and somebody he would have liked? Who cares? He already likes her. He's already heard her be snarky. He's been told all year she was good at Potions and was cheeky. There's no barrier that Harry needs to get over with Lily to feel bonded to her. The HBP being Snape is a turnaround and dramatic--Harry's freaked out by the idea the person he came to think of as a friend was his most hated enemy. Finding out the person he came to think of was his friend is actually a person to whom he already feels far stronger emotions is just kind of...awww. That's nice. It's not a challenge the way that, say, James acting like a jerk was. Lily having a relationship with Snape that wasn't wholly negative--that would be a challenge. Yet one Harry could understand since he himself *also* had a positive relationship to the Snape Lily would have known. He, too, has already defended Teen!Snape against others, so if that was something Lily did in the past Harry's got the groundwork laid to understand her in ways others didn't. That's something real to bond over or feel on the same wavelength about. Not that Mom was good at Potions, even if she was. > > Alla, thinks that Lily making those notes would have a layer of new > and delightful irony. m--who's probably explained thoroughly hear how she thinks Lily making those notes removes all irony and replaces it with a "mildly sweet, but doesn't say much" since Lily being the voice that Harry liked in HBP is no more ironic than James being the voice Harry liked in HBP.She's the type of person Harry thinks the voice *should* belong to, so isn't ironic. And in fact it seems to require a convenient dual personality for the HBP. Instead of being the complicated person whom Harry liked but had a dark side, he's comfortably split into the Dark Side being the guy he's always hated and the part he liked being somebody he loves. -m (whose sig line was too long to really be considered a sig line!) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 20:16:33 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 20:16:33 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook In-Reply-To: <004301c74e17$46251c40$4580400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164850 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > Alla: > > It all depends on what one is banking would be the crucial emotional > > connection that would help Harry to win the final battle. > > > > If one thinks that the crucial connection would be Harry/Snape, then > > sure notes in the book have to be Snape's to make sure that Harry > > had at least one point when he sympathised with young Snape, > > etc,etc,etc. > > > > But if one hopes ( as I sure do) that crucial connection would not > > be Harry/Snape, but Harry/Lily, that Snape is a plot device big one, > > but plot device nevertheless, designed to teach Harry what kind of > > person he should not be, the forgiveness, etc. > > Magpie: > Right. Harry and Lily don't need to "get to know each other" the way Harry > got to know Snape through the book. It would mean something if Harry learned > something from Lily that applied to his own emotional life. For instance, if > Lily had a relationship with Snape that we'll learn about later (one for > which the groundwork might have been laid in HBP via their shared Potions > skill) that would mean something to Harry. That's a place where he can get > to know Lily in a way that matters, and maybe model his behavior on her. Alla: Okay, seemed like a good quote to leave in, sorry if I left out anything crucial. I am sorry, but Harry and Lily do not need to know each other? Um, AFAIR Harry does not know that much about her at all. I still maintain that whether you ( hypothetical you) consider the possibility of notes being Lily depends on whom you think would matter more in relation to book 7. Why exactly Harry can only learn about something crucial about Lily which is related to Snape, if that is whay you are saying? As you know I do think that they had a connection and yes, it is likely that Harry would look at Snape through her eyes, but cannot HBP be just another piece of the puzzle about his mum, **not** about Snape? I do not get why not. Not dramatic enough? Again, yes, the reversal with Snape seemed dramatic enough, for sure, but who knows maybe reveal with Lily would be even more dramatic and somehow connected to the book. After all, Harry can return for it so maybe it will still be playing a role. Again, I do not insist that the notes were Lily's, it can totally be Snape's but the idea that it cannot be just because it will diminish Harry/Snape connection amuses me and I do not agree with it at all. JMO, Alla. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Feb 11 20:17:25 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 20:17:25 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164851 Carol: > With regard to the main plot, if one of Harry's Voldie-acquired > powers is possession, and his method of killing Voldemort is to > force him through the Veil using Love as his weapon, possessing > Sirius's body would provide Harry's soul with a means of > transportation back to the WW. (Voldie's own fractured soul would > remain behind with his body. He, like Sirius Black, would be truly > dead. But Harry's soul would only be, so to speak, along for the > ride, and he, unlike the others, could return.) Jen: Why is possession not the darkest of the dark magic in the WW and why, how, could Harry participate in such an experience without deeply harming 'the power the Dark Lord knows not'? The idea of Harry practicing possession runs counter to everything Dumbledore has told him about how he is protected from Voldemort. Possession is a vile power, it's far more invasive and controlling than the Imperius. I like the idea of Harry taking a journey to the Underworld, seeing the people he loves and who loved him. I feel certain JKR can accomplish this without having Harry stoop to Voldemort's level to make this journey. Carol: > I like this version of events because it gives Sirius Black's death > a purpose beyond a lesson in compassion for Harry (understanding the > suffering that others have endured because of Voldemort) by > providing a means for Harry to go beyond the Veil and return alive, > and it enables Harry to destroy Voldemort through a sacrificial > impulse without dying himself or committing murder. Jen: JKR has promised Sirius death will be given meaning and I sense the purpose will be much greater and more valuable for the defeat of Voldemort than a personal experience for Harry. All roads lead to Voldemort now and Harry has made a sort of peace with Sirius' death already. Bringing Sirius' body back for a funeral and so the WW will know the truth is rather anticlimatic in my opinion, something the story has moved beyond, not to mention Harry. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Feb 11 21:13:33 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 21:13:33 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164852 Ceridwen wrote: > > I doubt Pensieve memories because, in my opinion, leaving something like that or a letter lying around is just begging for the Bad Guys to find it. Carol responds: > As for Pensieve memories lying around, they're not kept in a Pensieve, and I'm quite sure DD made sure that all the Pensieve memories were back in his head or their labeled vials (they have to be labeled, or he wouldn't know Hokey's from Bob Ogden's) before he made the trip to the cave. I half-expect DD to have willed Harry the Pensieve and some bottled memories ("If I could put Time in a bottle. . . ," hint to CMC) that he hasn't yet seen, preferably of DD and Snape. Ceridwen: I didn't mean memories left in a Pensieve. I meant bottled. If there is a spy at the school or in the Order, the memories can be stolen and brought to LV. Or, if LV takes over Hogwarts early in DH as some have suggested, those bottled memories would be right there where he could get his hands on them. The only way I can't see that happening is if Dumbledore left some bottled memories in his vault, to be turned over to Harry upon DD's death. But again, what if there is a spy in Gringotts, or what if the goblins throw in with LV and allow him access to Dumbledore's vault? Memories in bottles, in my opinion, are too risky, and in a story involving espionage would be, again in my opinion, just begging for the bad guys to get their hands on something they don't need to see (Snape's remorse, Order discussions, Horcrux information, etc.). Sorry if I wasn't clear enough! Ceridwen, seconding the hint to CMC. From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Feb 11 21:40:54 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:40:54 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook References: Message-ID: <006b01c74e25$4f430fe0$4580400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164853 > Alla: > Okay, seemed like a good quote to leave in, sorry if I left out > anything crucial. > I am sorry, but Harry and Lily do not need to know each other? Um, > AFAIR Harry does not know that much about her at all. I still > maintain that whether you ( hypothetical you) consider the > possibility of notes being Lily depends on whom you think would > matter more in relation to book 7. Magpie: Harry doesn't know much about her, so nothing he does learn can be surprising. (He knew a bit more about James, and it was exactly what he knew that got subverted in the Pensieve.) Finding out that Lily was somebody he thought he would like upon reading her notes is nice, but not particularly interesting. He's just finding out his mother, whom he already thinks is fantasic without having met her, is truly fantastic. That's not anywhere near as satisfying as the surprise that this boy (whom Harry instinctively knew he was a boy and canon so far validated that impression) that he made into a special friend was actually someone he hated. Also the HBP's personality can be related to Snape's--we can easily "see" Snape in the HBP and vice versa now. Although I just realized I'm actually ignoring the main way that it is dramatic, because it seems like people often split the notes between Lily (Potions improvements) and Snape (Dark Arts). If the notes are Lily's she's the one creating dark and violent spells. Alla: > > Why exactly Harry can only learn about something crucial about Lily > which is related to Snape, if that is whay you are saying? As you > know I do think that they had a connection and yes, it is likely > that Harry would look at Snape through her eyes, but cannot HBP be > just another piece of the puzzle about his mum, **not** about Snape? Magpie: I wouldn't say he can only learn things about Lily through Snape--I don't think JKR is locked into that. But Lily isn't a puzzle that Harry's looking at pieces for. If Lily was the Potions half of the HBP that's just straightforward information that doesn't contradict anything or add to anything any more than Slughorn telling us she was cheeky and good at Potions and pretty does. (If she's all the notes then there's the technical issue of Snape having claimed to be the HBP, and it being Snape's book, and creating Sectumsempra and the spell used on him). Alla: > I do not get why not. Not dramatic enough? Again, yes, the reversal > with Snape seemed dramatic enough, for sure, but who knows maybe > reveal with Lily would be even more dramatic and somehow connected > to the book. Magpie: I would never say there's no way JKR *couldn't* come up with a dramatic story around the voice in the book being Lily alone because hey, who am I to predict what the woman could do! But that would be at the expense of throwing out the story she wrote in HBP. Harry can go on defending the HBP. Alla: Again, I do not insist that the notes were Lily's, it can totally be > Snape's but the idea that it cannot be just because it will diminish > Harry/Snape connection amuses me and I do not agree with it at all. Magpie: Do you mean because the Harry/Snape hatred is already so intense it doesn't need the addition of Harry feeling tricked into liking him as the HBP? I guess I would agree with that--Harry doesn't need to have bonded with the HBP to feel strongly about Snape! But the HBP storyline does seem to slot easily into that dynamic and say things about both characters. If it's Lily responsible for all that stuff that could certainly be dramatic-but in a way that makes me think "Why on earth wasn't Lily introduced as a character sooner?" Because...Lily created violent Dark Magic spells that almost led to a death by Harry's hand? A spell she created to be used on "enemies?" And her Levicorpus spell is being used by DEs? I know JKR tends to layer people and give them contradictions, but it seems like we're going to need more than one book to deal with the Dark Mother that is Lily in this scenario. She's sounding a bit Galadriel under the power of the Ring! -m From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Feb 11 22:00:48 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:00:48 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164854 Alla: > Heee, you see Ceridwen, I knew there would be a right place to post what I was telling you yesterday. Ceridwen: Heee! That's why I don't post too often in these threads: sooner or later someone else says what I wanted to say first, so I come along with what amounts to a big "Me, too." The thing is, it's so interesting to see what everyone is saying. I agree with Cassy, that Harry has been underestimating Lily for the last six books. He's growing up a young man and so is more interested in his father, but the irony of that is, it was his mother's sacrifice that kept him alive and enabled the fulfillment of part of the prophecy, of LV marking the One. But, I agree with Carol, too, that Snape is a genius in Potions in his own right, and doesn't need to have Lily Evans writing in his Potions text. I don't see why Lily being good at Potions means that Snape can't be. This may not be what is meant in these discussions, but sometimes, that's how it reads to me: Lily was the genius, Lily made the improvements, Lily wrote in Snape's book (Didn't she have a book of her own?), and so on. I don't think it's an either/or - either Lily was good at Potions or Snape was. Alla: > Slughorn praise of her is enough for me to believe that Lily was very talented at least, whether the notes in the book are hers or not. Ceridwen: I don't see why Lily can't be talented if Snape is. I do think Slughorn has a soft spot for young Lily. She's bright, she's pretty, she's cheeky, and she's overcome an obstacle of birth to someone like Slughorn, who is genteely prejudiced and not aware at all that he is. I don't think, based on what we've seen of Slughorn's collecting, that he gave young Severus much thought. Snape was bright, but he wasn't personable, he was a loner from what we've seen, and he was headed down the wrong path. He was as likely to end up infamous instead of famous if he was noteworthy at all. I don't think Slughorn's aversion to potential DEs that we saw in HBP is a new thing. He was very aware of what his mentoring of Tom Riddle might look like to a disinterested observer, see the faked memory. Speculation: He might have been aware of it even during VWI. So, I think Slughorn is still pushing one of his Slug Clubbers at the expense of a non-club-member when he praises Lily and doesn't praise Snape. Though, I also do agree with Carol and someone else, who said that the "Even you, Severus..." sounds like he is speaking about the pinnacle of the students, Snape. And, yes, I do think Snape could excel in both Potions and DADA. I also think that Lily could excel in Potions and Charms. The smart kids I knew back in high school were smart in several different subjects, not just one. Alla: > If one thinks that the crucial connection would be Harry/Snape, then sure notes in the book have to be Snape's to make sure that Harry had at least one point when he sympathised with young Snape, etc,etc,etc. *(snip)* Alla, thinks that Lily making those notes would have a layer of new and delightful irony. Ceridwen: If we find DDM!Snape in DH, then there will need to be some connection between Harry and Snape. Given DDM!Snape, then JKR has set up the Potions book to perform that function, I think. It will help the story along. I think Harry's connection with Lily will be on a more personal level than Potions. Potions had nothing to do with her sacrifice as far as we know now. When we see Harry's connection to James, as we discussed, it was not in connection with a class though he did see James at Hogwarts - the connection was in James's interaction with his friends, in his sacrifice at GH, in the impression he made on people, and from OotP onward, in his dramatic change from two-against- one James to Hero James. Sure, James became an Animagus, but that has had very little to do with Harry other than to give him an idea of the extent James would go to for his friends. In my opinion, of course - Harry hasn't become an Animagus. Also in my opinion, Lily's big connection to Harry being a class in school just isn't at the heart level. It was her sacrificial love that saved him, so I think the big reveal for Harry will be on that level, too. I wholeheartedly agree that Harry will need to make a connection to Lily in order to complete his journey to Manhood, and also to connect to the Hero inside of himself. I just think it will be more elemental than Potions notes. Ceridwen, wondering if whatever the connection to Lily is hasn't been under Harry's (and the reader's) nose all along, and wondering what it could be. From iam.kemper at gmail.com Sun Feb 11 22:04:03 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 14:04:03 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: It's more complex than that.... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40702111404j45a24619i23d8cb9ac1dd8c2@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164855 > Steve/bboyminn wrote: > > "Dumbledore is giving me a lot of trouble". I don't think for a > minute that this means that Dumbledore is not dead. I'm sure he is > quite dead, but I always expected him to be in the last book even if > he is dead. Harry's parents are dead and they have made several > appearances in the Series. > ... > We already know that Dumbledore has one enduring presence > in the remaining book; his portrait. That will be > something. I just can't imagine Dumbledore's portrait > being there and Harry not talking to it a time or two. > In addition, I suspect there are penseive memories and > perhaps some letters. So, that represents Dumbledore's > presence in the book. > > In some way the wise old now-dead mentor alwasy finds a way to make > his presence felt, but that doesn't mean he will be jumping out from > behind the curtain saying "Just kidding". > > > Ceridwen replied: > Maybe he'll jump out from behind the curtain and say 'Phoenix, you > know, back from Beyond'. ;) > > > Good catch, Steve! I'm up for hearing anyone's take on this. I > doubt Pensieve memories because, in my opinion, leaving something > like that or a letter lying around is just begging for the Bad Guys > to find it. We don't know how much a portrait could recall from its > subject's life, so that's hit or miss (but I'm sure JKR can pull it > off). Spirit presence like the Priori Incantatum (that was the GoF > effect, wasn't it?) or like Obi-Wan Kenobi is possible, but perhaps a > bit cheesy and 'been there, done that'. > Kemper now: I disagree. Dumbledore can leave a note for Harry saying,"Remember how you got the stone." (Obviously, it would be a bit more discreet.) Then Harry can go to the Mirror of Erised and, like magic, a vial of memories can suddenly appear in his pocket. I know there's the arguement that we've already seen that but... we've seen a lot: portraits talking, ghosts talking, dead parents talking, etc. So why not a natural tie back to the first book? But... if DD were to come from behind a curtain, I think he would say, 'Boo!' Kemper From kking0731 at gmail.com Mon Feb 12 00:50:54 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:50:54 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164856 Let's really let our hair down and go to the extreme! The extreme is where we need to go if we can even compete with Herself in knowing the ending before it is written (well read, since we know it is written). Let me start out by asking why Voldemort's mother died from something as simple as childbirth when Hagrid was appalled by the thoughts of Lily and James being killed in a simple car crash? What if Voldy's Mom gave her powers away so that she could die? What if she gave her powers away to a very young child named Lily? Merope's powers would no longer save her from death and allow her to die. Lil' Lily would acquire Merope's power and become the first witch in the family. This could also be the connection of why Lily's child would look like Tom...she would have a bit of Slytherin in her after all. (Slughorn was mesmerized by Lily [and Harry] even though she was muggleborn) I'm just going to leave this right here and see how many persons are up for thinking beyond Canon but including it. All of my thoughts so far can perfectly fit into what we have learned so far and I can secure this statement if need be (with the exception of the obvious proposal). From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon Feb 12 01:04:27 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 01:04:27 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164857 snow15145: > What if Voldy's Mom gave her powers away so that she could die? What if she gave her powers away to a very young child named Lily? Merope's powers would no longer save her from death and allow her to die. Lil' Lily would acquire Merope's power and become the first witch in the family. Ceridwen: The problem with this is, Lily wasn't born yet. The various timelines place Tom Riddle's birth in the 1920s, while Lily, like the Marauders and Snape, were born in the late 1950s or in 1960. He was old enough to have gone through Hogwarts and effected his changes to become Lord Voldemort instead of Tom Riddle before Lily started Hogwarts. If Lily was old enough to have received Merope's powers this way, she would be older than Tom Riddle by at least a few days, and would not have been in school during the first Voldemort war. Also, how does one give away one's powers? She apparently lost the will to live, and the ability to do magic. But this was more of an emotional response to losing the love of her life, as well as years of constant degredation from her father. Maybe JKR could come up with some way for a witch or wizard to donate their powers to someone else, but at this time, it seems more to me that magical powers are like any other trait, and can't be passed to someone else any more than sight or hearing. Ceridwen. From kking0731 at gmail.com Mon Feb 12 01:27:13 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 01:27:13 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164858 snow15145: > What if Voldy's Mom gave her powers away so that she could die? What if she gave her powers away to a very young child named Lily? Merope's powers would no longer save her from death and allow her to die. Lil' Lily would acquire Merope's power and become the first witch in the family. Ceridwen: The problem with this is, Lily wasn't born yet. The various timelines place Tom Riddle's birth in the 1920s, while Lily, like the Marauders and Snape, were born in the late 1950s or in 1960. He was old enough to have gone through Hogwarts and effected his changes to become Lord Voldemort instead of Tom Riddle before Lily started Hogwarts. If Lily was old enough to have received Merope's powers this way, she would be older than Tom Riddle by at least a few days, and would not have been in school during the first Voldemort war. Snow: Ok! How about Lily's mom? Ceridwen: Also, how does one give away one's powers? She apparently lost the will to live, and the ability to do magic. But this was more of an emotional response to losing the love of her life, as well as years of constant degredation from her father. Maybe JKR could come up with some way for a witch or wizard to donate their powers to someone else, but at this time, it seems more to me that magical powers are like any other trait, and can't be passed to someone else any more than sight or hearing. Snow: Then how did Harry get Voldemort's powers if he, by prophecy interpretation, is equal to him? From kat7555 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 11 22:42:30 2007 From: kat7555 at yahoo.com (kat7555) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:42:30 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164859 Carol responds: > The point would be to give Sirius Black the proper funeral he never > received and to give Harry a chance to accept his godfather's death > as he accepts Dumbledore's. It would also provide a chance for the WW > to be told Black's real story. I don't think the MoM ever publicly > acknowledged its blunder regarding him. To use a jargon term that I > hate, bringing Sirius's body back would give his story "closure." I hope you are correct as well. Sirius was my favorite character next to Harry and I always felt sympathy for him being convicted of a crime he didn't commit. I think Sirius gave Harry the unconditional love that Harry always needed. He was more willing to share his home than the Dursley's ever were. I also believe that Harry was the closest person to a son that Sirius would ever have. Kathy From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Feb 12 01:15:15 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 20:15:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] To the Extreme References: Message-ID: <008f01c74e43$411aa8b0$4580400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164860 Snow: > Let's really let our hair down and go to the extreme! The extreme is > where we need to go if we can even compete with Herself in knowing > the ending before it is written (well read, since we know it is > written). > > Let me start out by asking why Voldemort's mother died from something > as simple as childbirth when Hagrid was appalled by the thoughts of > Lily and James being killed in a simple car crash? > > What if Voldy's Mom gave her powers away so that she could die? What > if she gave her powers away to a very young child named Lily? > Merope's powers would no longer save her from death and allow her to > die. Lil' Lily would acquire Merope's power and become the first > witch in the family. Magpie: If you're referring to Lily Evans (who was the first witch in her family) she would have been negative decades years young when Merope died. She didn't exist yet and wouldn't for years. Snow: > This could also be the connection of why Lily's child would look like > Tom...she would have a bit of Slytherin in her after all. (Slughorn > was mesmerized by Lily [and Harry] even though she was muggleborn) Magpie: But Lily Potter's child doesn't look like Tom. He looks like James and Lily herself. -m From kking0731 at gmail.com Mon Feb 12 01:55:19 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 01:55:19 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: <008f01c74e43$411aa8b0$4580400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164862 Magpie: But Lily Potter's child doesn't look like Tom. He looks like James and Lily herself. Snow: In COS, Tom says "...We even look something alike..." pg, 317 From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Feb 12 02:12:45 2007 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 21:12:45 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: To the Extreme Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164863 In a message dated 2/11/2007 8:59:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kking0731 at gmail.com writes: In COS, Tom says "...We even look something alike..." pg, 317 ================= Yes - they both have dark hair, & (apparently) unusually-interesting eyes. Severus & Sirius look (AND act) more alike than THAT - are THEY related, too??? Sherrie "What's got YOUR wand in a knot?" - Hermione Granger, HARRY POTTER & THE GOBLET OF FIRE [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Mon Feb 12 01:54:19 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 20:54:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] To the Extreme In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001801c74e48$b649cc10$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 164864 -- snow15145 wrote-- >>>Let me start out by asking why Voldemort's mother died from something as simple as childbirth when Hagrid was appalled by the thoughts of Lily and James being killed in a simple car crash? <<< -- Ronin's Comments- While I found most of this theory intriguing, I must disagree with this first part. Wizards and witches seem to be able to die from natural/accidental causes. (Though at much later ages than Muggles I suppose) I was under the impression that Hagrid, was reacting to the idea of; a. Harry being lied to about what kind of people his parents were. b. Harry not knowing anything about the WW. c. Suggesting that the Potters would use such forms of Muggle transport, rather than apparating, broomsticks, floo powder, portkeys, etc. d. That they were to good at magic to have been unable to avoid a muggle accident. Nicholas Flamel, died of old age after the stone was destroyed. I remember other mentions of natural/accidental deaths within the series as well, but can't place them from memory. I'm thinking it may have been during Sirius's explanation of the tapestry at 12 Grimauld Place. I'll have to dig out my copy of SS and have a look at exactly what Hagrid said and the context to be sure. Harry will be very upset if he has Slytherin blood in his veins! Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 12 03:00:19 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 03:00:19 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook In-Reply-To: <006b01c74e25$4f430fe0$4580400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164865 > Alla: > Again, I do not insist that the notes were Lily's, it can totally be > > Snape's but the idea that it cannot be just because it will diminish > > Harry/Snape connection amuses me and I do not agree with it at all. > > Magpie: > Do you mean because the Harry/Snape hatred is already so intense it doesn't > need the addition of Harry feeling tricked into liking him as the HBP? I > guess I would agree with that--Harry doesn't need to have bonded with the > HBP to feel strongly about Snape! But the HBP storyline does seem to slot > easily into that dynamic and say things about both characters. > > If it's Lily responsible for all that stuff that could certainly be > dramatic-but in a way that makes me think "Why on earth wasn't Lily > introduced as a character sooner?" Because...Lily created violent Dark Magic > spells that almost led to a death by Harry's hand? A spell she created to be > used on "enemies?" And her Levicorpus spell is being used by DEs? Alla: Heeee, sure yes, the Dark spells in the book are the strongest argument that this is Snape's book after all ( although I am not sure again why JKR cannot go after the Potions being Lily's and DADA being Snape). BUT the funny thing is that I would **love** for those spells to be Lily's as well, hehe. Could be the flaw I am longing for Saint!Lily to have and nice connection of Harry's using the spells which his Good but not perfect mom created during the experiments of her youth. Magpie: > I know JKR tends to layer people and give them contradictions, but it seems > like we're going to need more than one book to deal with the Dark Mother > that is Lily in this scenario. She's sounding a bit Galadriel under the > power of the Ring! Alla: Oh man, I am sitting here giggling about *Galadriel under the power of the ring* comparison. You sure have a way with words, love it. To sum up - I sure get the dramatic possibilities and big one of the book being Snape and if it was the last book, sure , why not. It is just with one book left and with JKR hinting strongly about big revelations about Lily, well, I am just not sure that we can be so sure of our instincts of where the story is going, you know? Here is the most obvious example - DD's death. Did you have any doubt that Dumbledore would die in book 6 or 7? I had none , although I expressed hope that JKR would do something which I would consider more creative and unusual and will not kill him. But in something based on hero journey as Herself said - wise old mentor always dies, so anybody can predict DD fate, no? But please tell me honestly did you at all expected DD death by Snape's hand before book 6? Not while you were reading HBP, because I know some people figured it out since Spinner end, but after OOP, did you think of that at all? What hints in the story showed to you **that** possibility, or probably what beats? So, I am not sure that HBP connection with Harry is not a red herring, that is all. JMO, Alla From juli17 at aol.com Mon Feb 12 03:55:21 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:55:21 EST Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex th Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164866 Carol: > I like this version of events because it gives Sirius Black's death > a purpose beyond a lesson in compassion for Harry (understanding the > suffering that others have endured because of Voldemort) by > providing a means for Harry to go beyond the Veil and return alive, > and it enables Harry to destroy Voldemort through a sacrificial > impulse without dying himself or committing murder. Jen: JKR has promised Sirius death will be given meaning and I sense the purpose will be much greater and more valuable for the defeat of Voldemort than a personal experience for Harry. All roads lead to Voldemort now and Harry has made a sort of peace with Sirius' death already. Bringing Sirius' body back for a funeral and so the WW will know the truth is rather anticlimatic in my opinion, something the story has moved beyond, not to mention Harry. Julie: I can see Carol's theory working, with the emphasis on Sirius being the one who is able to get Harry back to the living, and *only* Sirius, as he didn't really "die" but fell behind the veil, taking his body with him. *That* would be the meaning in Sirius's death, that he was able to help Harry live again. It's certainly something Sirius, dead or alive, would consider a great accomplishment and honor. Despite his faults, I think he really does love Harry (yes, even if he only knew Harry as a baby for a brief 16 months, and wasted most of his golden opportunity to know Harry as a teenager). In Sirius's mind this might even be something of an atonement to James and Lily, for convincing them to make Peter the Secret-Keeper. IMO, having a funeral for Sirius's body would be purely secondary, since I don't feel Harry needs that to come to terms with his loss. Meeting Sirius again behind the veil and getting the chance to say goodbye would accomplish that quite nicely. I'd be quite happy with just a reference (perhaps in that final epilogue) that Sirius's body was respectfully buried, no doubt next to James and Lily. Julie, liking Carol's theory for the most part [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aandj at labyrinth.net.au Mon Feb 12 03:55:21 2007 From: aandj at labyrinth.net.au (Jocelyn Grunow) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:55:21 +1100 Subject: Childbirth (was to the extreme) In-Reply-To: <001801c74e48$b649cc10$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164867 >>>> Let me start out by asking why Voldemort's mother died from >>>> something > as simple as childbirth when Hagrid was appalled by the thoughts of > Lily and James being killed in a simple car crash? <<< > Firstly, we are talking about the 1920s, when childbirth was much more dangerous in general than today. Secondly, she gave birth in a muggle institution. Thirdly, even today childbirth is not utterly safe. I know of one young woman with no obvious preconditions who died in childbirth. less than 5 years ago. I was speaking with my obstetrician about my most recent pregnancy and used the phrase 'very few people die...'. He gave me a rather odd look and said "Not many people seem to realise that women do die in childbirth, even today." We had a little conversation about that fact. Actually I think most people who haven't been at one are appallingly ignorant about childbirth. Before my first delivery my antenatal class was asked what they feared about giving birth. I was the only one who was at all worried about the pain. Most of the class thought that because it was natural and joyful they could rise above it! I often wondered what they thought when they actually reached transition. Childbirth has been vastly improved since the 1920, but it is still viscerally painful, terrifyingly primeval and potentially lethal (as well as utterly undignified). Erm - don't mean to put off anyone still contemplating it. I did it 3 times, after all. Anyway, the point I am making is that even if wizards in the 1920s had better techniques in assisting childbirth, she didn't have access to them and it is a process which is inherently dangerous. Jocelyn From va32h at comcast.net Mon Feb 12 04:49:34 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 04:49:34 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: <008f01c74e43$411aa8b0$4580400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164868 Snow: Let's really let our hair down and go to the extreme! The extreme is where we need to go if we can even compete with Herself in knowing the ending before it is written (well read, since we know it is written). Well, I have to disagree with your entire premise. I detest wild improbable theories that have to do with completely random premises, including such old favorites as: 1) Any "Good" character is secretly ESE! 2) Any "Bad" character is secretly good! 3) Anyone dead is actually alive! 4) Two seemingly opposite characters are in love! 5) Any random character is actually the son/mother/daughter/father of any other character 6) Any random character is: an unregistered Animagus/impersonating someone via polyjuice potion/under the Imperius Curse (usually this situation relates to items 1 or 2). This will sound crazy I know, but I don't really find JKR's plot twists all that wild and incomprehensible. Perhaps it is because I didn't read any of the books until shortly before the release of HBP. I read the first five one after the other, and with no "three year summer" in which to ruminate on plot possibilites, I wasn't on the lookout for one twist or another. I think JKR does plenty of convential things in her stories...the "extreme" plot twists, like Pettigrew being Scabbers or Crouch Jr. being both alive and impersonating Moody all year long, come with concepts and characters that aren't fully explained, or explained at all, until the book in which they are revealed. Why would we suspect that Scabbers was a wizard who had faked his own death 13 years ago, when we didn't even know the word Animagus or the name Peter Pettigrew until PoA? Why would we think Barty Crouch Jr. had faked his death, when we didn't even know of such a person until GoF? When JKR wants to give us a real "clue", it's obvious - like Aberforth being Dumbledore's brother, or Ron & Hermione (delusional H/Hr shippers aside) or heaven help us - R.A.B. This is not a knock on Rowling at all - far from it. I think she's *too good* a writer to whip out any fantastical premise that add nothing to the plot or themes, just for the sake of surprising us. Of course whenever I bring this up, I get the inevitable replies of "well anything is possible" or "what else is there to do before July 21" or my old favorite "well it probably won't happen, but it's fun to think about." So I'm just a fusty old crank who doesn't like to have fun, or imagine the impossible, and will thus not be playing the game of "letting our hair down". va32h, who has decided that she should perhaps dress as McGonnagal for the book release party, because her present attitude is very Minerva-ish. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Feb 12 04:52:14 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 04:52:14 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex th In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164869 Julie: > I can see Carol's theory working, with the emphasis on Sirius being > the one who is able to get Harry back to the living, and *only* > Sirius, as he didn't really "die" but fell behind the veil, taking > his body with him. *That* would be the meaning in Sirius's death, > that he was able to help Harry live again. It's certainly > something Sirius, dead or alive, would consider a great > accomplishment and honor. Jen: I see the theory from this angle, Sirius helping Harry return from behind the Veil and helping him live again--it's a nice idea in that respect. I can't get past the part about Harry possessing Voldemort and sending him through the Veil as his ultimate end. To me it's the opposite of what Dumbledore explained to Harry at the end of OOTP, that Harry's heart saved him. Possession would not be something like Parseltongue, a power not only used by dark wizards but the 'good and the great'. So far the only character using possession is iredeemably evil and uses it to control people for his own ends. If Harry is able to visit by some other means, I'm certain it would be very moving for him to see those people who 'stood before him one by one' and if he were able to return Sirius' body in some other way.... Julie: > Despite his faults, I think he really does love Harry (yes, even > if he only knew Harry as a baby for a brief 16 months, and wasted > most of his golden opportunity to know Harry as a teenager). In > Sirius's mind this might even be something of an atonement to James > and Lily, for convincing them to make Peter the Secret-Keeper. Jen: I agree all his efforts since returning have been to that end, attempting to make up for mistakes he made and the feeling he 'as good as killed' Lily and James and left Harry an orphan. Going to the DOM was yet one more way Sirius believed he could help protect Harry in a way he wasn't able to do with James or Lily. I pulled up two quotes to have on the thread as reference, not because they game me some great insight . Did I miss any? First one, World Book Day, 2004: Cookie246122: Why did you kill Sirius? It made me very sad :( JK Rowling replies -> I'm really, really sorry. I didn't want to do it, but there was a reason. If you think you can forgive me, keep reading, you'll find out. [I feel really guilty now]. Here's one other (ITV, 2005): Rowling: 'I think you will realise why he had to go in terms of plot when you read the seventh book.' Jen R. From wfgriffeth at comcast.net Mon Feb 12 04:42:13 2007 From: wfgriffeth at comcast.net (wfgriffeth) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 04:42:13 -0000 Subject: Creativity in the Wizarding World Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164870 In the WW magic is not just a set of skills to be learned -- it's also a realm that grows ever richer through the invention of new spells, potions, and magical devices. Although I admire Harry's courage, loyalty, and force of will in confronting Voldemort and although Hermione is obviously intelligent and diligent, I confess myself disappointed that their generation shows very little magical creativity. The Weasley twins' inventions, including the swamp in OotP, demonstrate that they have the most imagination of any contemporaries of The Trio. In constrast, the preceding generation of the Marauders, Lily, and Snape seem much more inventive. In HBP Slughorn was very impressed with Lily Evans' natural gifts for making potions. Snape documented his new potions and spells in the margins of his copy of Advanced Potion Making. Most impressively, the Marauders' Map in PoA can penetrate even an animagus transformation to detect the true identity of everyone on the Hogwarts grounds and provide his or her location at each moment. Wouldn't it be great if JKR would go back a generation to describe how the Marauders and their fellows developed such creativity and what other innovations they produced? BillG From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Feb 12 05:10:02 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:10:02 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups]To the Extreme/Snape, Lily&Potions References: Message-ID: <00eb01c74e64$104ac460$4580400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164871 Magpie: But Lily Potter's child doesn't look like Tom. He looks like James and Lily herself. Snow: In COS, Tom says "...We even look something alike..." pg, 317 Magpie: Didn't rememer that. You got me there! So Tom refers to a vague similarity of looks between him and Harry that no other character remarks on (including Harry that I can remember). But why would Harry develop a physical resemblance to Tom because Merope gave her magic to Lily (who still hasn't been born for years after Merope dies)? Alla: But please tell me honestly did you at all expected DD death by Snape's hand before book 6? Not while you were reading HBP, because I know some people figured it out since Spinner end, but after OOP, did you think of that at all? What hints in the story showed to you **that** possibility, or probably what beats? So, I am not sure that HBP connection with Harry is not a red herring, that is all. Magpie: Now you're making me totally want to see this Dark!Lily. She really is more interesting than the Sainted one--and Harry sure has overlooked her. I didn't see Snape killing DD at all before HBP--didn't see that coming at all! I've no idea how the next book will go either. I guess the reason I feel like the Potions book can't be a red herring is that it was the solution to a mystery already. It's like saying that it turns out Faux!Moody wasn't really Barty Crouch when that was a mystery brought up and solved in GoF. -m (who is refraining from responding to a post that was presumably meant off list just to say she did not "blow up" Hagrid's calling Filch a Squib into a racist remark but simply said, as the post itself did, that it was hurtful and based on prejudice...oops, I guess I'm not refraining!;-) From va32h at comcast.net Mon Feb 12 05:20:43 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 05:20:43 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex th In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164872 First Julie: > I can see Carol's theory working, with the emphasis on Sirius being > the one who is able to get Harry back to the living, and *only* > Sirius, as he didn't really "die" but fell behind the veil, taking > his body with him. *That* would be the meaning in Sirius's death, > that he was able to help Harry live again. It's certainly > something Sirius, dead or alive, would consider a great > accomplishment and honor. Then Jen: I see the theory from this angle, Sirius helping Harry return from behind the Veil and helping him live again--it's a nice idea in that respect. Now va32h: Yes, I like that idea as well. A popular theory is that Harry would be happy to sacrifice himself in the end, because he'd be with his parents and Sirius. But Sirius could convince him that he (Harry) has a life and a future awaiting him, and that eternity with Mum & Dad isn't the best way to make use of the sacrifice they made to save him. Well, James and Lily could say that as well, I suppose. But Harry actually knows Sirius better, and would, I think, be more inclined to listen to him "man to man". Not sure I'm liking the Voldemort-possession aspect of that theory, however. va32h From aceworker at yahoo.com Mon Feb 12 05:26:49 2007 From: aceworker at yahoo.com (career advisor) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 21:26:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: What will be is Shacklebolts and Tonks role in DH? Any ideas? Message-ID: <525475.33164.qm@web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164873 What is Shacklebolt role going to be in the DH. His name means to 'bar the door' and he was left in charge of the PM. Voldemort does seem to be trying to control the muggle government a bit what with the failed Imperio curse on Hurbert Churley. Is Shacklebolt going to have to defend the PM. Is Voldemort going to attack Downing Street? Might we get a chapter from the PM's persepctive on a wizards duel. Might it be Shacklebolt vs. Snape? How about Tonks? And some of the other aurors. Are there going to be larger almost set piece battles in this novel then in the ones before. Do you think JKR can really write a large epic battle well? Is action one of her strong points? I just found out that Tonk is a British word meaning: 'to hit hard'. It also means Thus Tonks hits hard. That is an appropriate name for an auror. What do you think? --------------------------------- No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Mon Feb 12 06:35:10 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 06:35:10 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]To the Extreme/Snape, Lily&Potions In-Reply-To: <00eb01c74e64$104ac460$4580400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164874 > > Alla: > But please tell me honestly did you at all expected DD death by Snape's hand > before book 6? Not while you were reading HBP, because I know some people > figured it out since Spinner end, but after OOP, did you think of that at > all? > > What hints in the story showed to you **that** possibility, or probably what > beats? > > So, I am not sure that HBP connection with Harry is not a red herring, that > is all. > Magpie: > Now you're making me totally want to see this Dark!Lily. She really is more > interesting than the Sainted one--and Harry sure has overlooked her. > > I didn't see Snape killing DD at all before HBP--didn't see that coming at > all! I've no idea how the next book will go either. I guess the reason I > feel like the Potions book can't be a red herring is that it was the > solution to a mystery already. It's like saying that it turns out Faux!Moody > wasn't really Barty Crouch when that was a mystery brought up and solved in > GoF. Julie: I think that's the difference between Snape killing Dumbledore/ Moody really being Barty Crouch Jr, and HBP notes being Lily's. The first two revelations explain things that went before and we fully see the clues and motivations. Snape took the UV and promised to complete Draco's task. We knew Draco had to do something for Voldemort, to murder someone--Dumbledore as it turned out--so it makes narrative sense when Snape kills Dumbledore, even if it still took us by surprise. Same with Fake!Moody. It explained some of Moody's actions when we learned that he was really Barty Crouch Jr. It made sense. But the HBP notes really being Lily's doesn't explain anything nor does it make any narrative sense. Why would Lily make up spells for enemies (really, what enemies did a schoolage Lily even have)? Makes lots of sense for teenage reject Snape though. And why would Lily's handwriting be small and cramped, just like Snape's? She'd have to be forging his script, or narrating the spells and he was writing them out? Which seems unnecessarily complicated. Furthermore, if Snape is taking credit for Lily's work, how does that even fit in with his seeming respect for her as indicated by the fact that he's never once mentioned her name in any derogatory way to Harry (despite the fact that he's willing to point out even the minor perceived faults of James'--"Your father was too stubborn to listen to me"...)? A boy who stole someone else's work isn't going to like or respect the person he stole from. To cover himself, he's going to do exactly the opposite, denigrate that person's abilities. Yet, again, Snape never says a word against Lily. Or what of Snape in a fury, his face "suffused with hatred" shouting "You dare use *my* own spells against me, Potter? ...etc...like your filthy father...etc." He takes credit here, while he's barely containing his rage. Has he fooled himself so well that the lies come out of his mouth so easily? No, it just doesn't fit with what's gone before. And it doesn't serve any purpose for JKR to show how much Snape excels at magic--both Potions and DADA--and then do a switch where he's really not that good after all. And she *has* shown Snape's skill throughout the books, most especially in HBP. Julie, who thinks Lily might have made a fine Potions Master if she'd wanted it (and had lived), but that doesn't take away in the least from Snape's clear mastery of the subject. From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Mon Feb 12 08:26:23 2007 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 03:26:23 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] J.K. Rowling Comments on Completing the Series Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164875 In a message dated 2/6/07 8:08:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, k12listmomma at comcast.net writes: > That, and a new rumour. (which, btw, doesn't refute the 7's theory, because > > she talks about the 7/7 date and the 7/21 date) To even think she considered > > giving in to fans with the 7/7/07 is something I find facinating. I love > this woman Sandy responds: Although I hold no stock in the 7's theory I am very disappointed that the release is not 7/7. I just think it would have been fitting that the release of the 7th book be on 7/7/07. I like that kind of thing. Although I know nothing about the writing or editing process I find it hard to believe that two weeks would have made a significant difference in either. As to the date relating to the London bombings, although, of course, JKR made no mention of that; being an American I would have no objection to it, or anything else, being released on 9/11, not that that was a possibility. I mention it only from the point of view that it would be nice to have something positive occur on either of those two dates. I am just happy that the release date has finally been announced, but it sure would have been nice if she had announced it with a bit more of a flourish. It's going to be a busy July, my least favorite month btw, and I need to start saving money for all of the to-do's. Sandy, looking forward to July, yet dreading it. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 12 14:33:01 2007 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewyck) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:33:01 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore in book 7 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164876 Hello, I'm a lurker but I have question which concerns DD in book 7. Since DD will be in book 7, would anyone care to give their theories or guesses as to which form DD will be? Will he be in a ghost form, which I doubt, or reborn DD like the phoenix, which is also doubtful since Jo said DD will not pull a Gandalf? What do you think guys? Thanks to all. Maria From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Feb 12 15:26:45 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 10:26:45 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: Muggle Awareness of WW (was "To the extreme") Message-ID: <12608122.1171294005906.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164877 snow15145: >> What if Voldy's Mom gave her powers away so that she could die? >What if she gave her powers away to a very young child named Lily? >Merope's powers would no longer save her from death and allow her to >die. Lil' Lily would acquire Merope's power and become the first >witch in the family. Ceridwen: >Also, how does one give away one's powers? She apparently lost the >will to live, and the ability to do magic. But this was more of an >emotional response to losing the love of her life, as well as years >of constant degredation from her father. Maybe JKR could come up >with some way for a witch or wizard to donate their powers to someone >else, but at this time, it seems more to me that magical powers are >like any other trait, and can't be passed to someone else any more >than sight or hearing. Bart: Still, this fits in with one of the running mysteries of the series: to what extent are muggles aware of the WW? Consider the following: 1) Squibs. It appears that squibs have a lot in common with the Amish religion/culture in the United States. The Amish are free until they take their vows as adults to reject their reliigon without being shunned; if they choose not to take vows, they are expected to live outside the communities, but are still welcome as guests within the community. However, the reason why few Amish avail themselves of this opportunity is that their education makes it difficult for them to live and thrive in the outside world (although some are trying short-cuts; there is currently a drug-dealing problem among the young Amish). Squibs, although without magic powers, unless their parents are VERY progressive, would also not have the background to thrive in the muggle world. This might explain the working class among the WW; those who are either squibs or could not pass any OWLS that required magical ability. Have we ever seen Rosmerta cast a spell? Now, one would guess that a squib would be culturally considered a more suitable marriage partner in the WW than a muggle, and a squib would naturally prefer a partner from the WW. But what of the suibs that make lives for themselves in the muggle world? They have knowledge of the WW, and it becomes likely that so will their spouses, or even children. And not all spouses and children are good at keeping secrets. 2) Parents of wizards/witches. Lily's family was supposedly happy to have a witch in the family. Hermione's family seems to have taken to it quite well. How do muggles get access to Diagon Alley? 3) Are memory charms used extensively to keep the existence of the WW a secret? How good ARE these memory charms? Consider what Snape said about thoughts when explaining how actual mind-reading is impossible to Harry. Even the pensieve only seems to remove sensory impressions from memories, and it appears that it can only be used to take memories voluntarily given, where the secondary impressions of these memories stay. So, if a marriage between a muggle and a WW'er ends badly, is the muggle's entire memory of the marriage stripped, with possibly years of their lives stolen? Consider what happened to the muggles abused in GOF. Was the removal of their memories of the incident any less abusive? Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Feb 12 16:11:03 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 11:11:03 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: Siriusly speaking... Message-ID: <12896523.1171296663626.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164878 Kathy: >I hope you are correct as well. Sirius was my favorite character >next to Harry and I always felt sympathy for him being convicted of >a crime he didn't commit. I think Sirius gave Harry the >unconditional love that Harry always needed. He was more willing to >share his home than the Dursley's ever were. I also believe that >Harry was the closest person to a son that Sirius would ever have. Bart: That last is the problem. Consider: Sirius was more or less in a fog from the time he was 22 or so until he was finally shocked into leaving prison. So, in Sirius' mind, he is not in his late 30's; he's still in his early 20's. And he becomes closely associated with Harry only after Harry is a teenager. I forget who pointed it out (Dumbledore? Molly?), but I agree that Sirius does NOT see Harry as a son; he sees Harry as a substitute for James, as a best friend. Harry, on the other hand, sees Sirius as a father figure. And, frankly, that difference of opinion was a key to getting Sirius killed. Frankly, if you look at the characters, the person who has treated Harry the most like one would feel he would treat his own son has been Hagrid (if someone wants to launch a subject on THAT, I'll be happy to go into detail). Luckily, if Hagrid has a son of his own, it appears that the mother will be a balancing influence... Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Feb 12 17:21:38 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 12:21:38 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: To the Extreme Message-ID: <24614976.1171300898551.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164879 Magpie: >But Lily Potter's child doesn't look like Tom. He looks like James and >Lily >herself. Snow: >In COS, Tom says "...We even look something alike..." pg, 317 Bart: Both Magpie and Snow are correct. Could Lily be a Riddle? Bart From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Feb 12 17:27:26 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:27:26 -0000 Subject: Siriusly speaking... In-Reply-To: <12896523.1171296663626.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164880 > Bart: > That last is the problem. Consider: Sirius was more or less in a fog from the time he was 22 or so until he was finally shocked into leaving prison. So, in Sirius' mind, he is not in his late 30's; he's still in his early 20's. And he becomes closely associated with Harry only after Harry is a teenager. I forget who pointed it out (Dumbledore? Molly?), but I agree that Sirius does NOT see Harry as a son; he sees Harry as a substitute for James, as a best friend. Harry, on the other hand, sees Sirius as a father figure. And, frankly, that difference of opinion was a key to getting Sirius killed. Frankly, if you look at the characters, the person who has treated Harry the most like one would feel he would treat his own son has been Hagrid (if someone wants to launch a subject on THAT, I'll be happy to go into detail). Luckily, if Hagrid has a son of his own, it appears that the mother will be a balancing influence... Magpie: I don't think we should take Molly's word for it--she wasn't exactly objective in her claiming Sirius thought Harry was James, and Hermione can't exactly understand the mind of the guy. I do agree that Sirius wasn't really able to handle the father role and that his history had made him naturally relate to Harry more as a peer than as a father. Though I don't think that got him killed. His dad probably would have rushed out to save Harry as well. As to Hagrid seeing Harry as a son...that's a scary thought to me. This is Hagrid who gets an illegal dragon egg, shares his crime with Harry because it's so cool and then 11-year-old Harry has to get him out of trouble by getting rid of the thing when Hagrid just can't let go of it? And lets Harry get detention for doing it for him without admitting his responsibility? (Even GIVES Harry the detention as if he had nothing to do with how he got there.) Who has the kids constantly frustrated at his inability to get certain aspects of his job? Who cries and guilts Harry into things? (Sirius isn't the only one wanting Harry to leave the safety of the school to attend to his needs.) Seems to me Harry's accepted that he's got to be the adult with Hagrid for years now. I suppose this might be the way Hagrid would relate to his own children as well, but then, Hagrid has a rather odd relationship with his brother as well. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 12 17:44:49 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:44:49 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164881 Carol earlier: > > The point would be to give Sirius Black the proper funeral he never received and to give Harry a chance to accept his godfather's death as he accepts Dumbledore's. It would also provide a chance for the WW to be told Black's real story. I don't think the MoM ever publicly acknowledged its blunder regarding him. To use a jargon term that I hate, bringing Sirius's body back would give his story "closure." > > Alla: > > Thanks. I guess what I do not get is how bringing the body of the > person who is already behind the veil would bring the story closure. > I think the only closure which is important IMO of course is Harry's > closure and I think, again IMO that Harry can get his closure by > talking and saying good buy to Sirius when he is there and leave > Sirius left in peace. > > For some reason, and I am sure you did not mean it that way, but > this is how it feels to me, if Harry brings Sirius body back, it > would feel to me as if diggging his grave. I would hate that. Carol responds: That was what I meant: emotional "closure" for Harry of the sort he receives from Dumbledore's funeral, and an end to Sirius Black's story because the WW would finally know that he was a good guy who died fighting a Death Eater rather than an escaped prisoner and supposed murderer whose story has never properly been told in the Daily Prophet. The MoM could make an official statement, which they couldn't do when they didn't have his body. And just seeing the body (having already spoken to spirit!Sirius) would help Harry to accept that Sirius wasn't coming back to earth (but he'd know that death isn't the end of everything, so he could accept that). People complained that Sirius never had so much as a memorial service. Here's a chance for a hero's funeral. Why not? It makes sense to me. > > Carol earlier: > > With regard to the main plot, if one of Harry's Voldie-acquired powers> is possession, and his method of killing Voldemort is to force him through the Veil using Love as his weapon, possessing Sirius's body would provide Harry's soul with a means of transportation back to the WW. (Voldie's own fractured soul would remain behind with his body. He, like Sirius Black, would be truly dead. But Harry's soul would only be, so to speak, along for the ride, and he, unlike the others, could return.) > > > > Alla: > > But why Harry would not be able to find another way back? Carol: Maybe, but why not use the means available? Two superfluous bodies (Sirius Black's and Voldie's), one superfluous soul (Harry's). Using Black's body would make it (as opposed to Voldie's) available for burial (and his reputation available for vindication) and it would provide a means for Harry to escape the Underworld and return to his own body. What other way would you prefer, assuming that I'm right about the two-way trip behind the Veil and back? Carol, who certainly wasn't thinking about "digging Sirius's grave," only about giving him the funeral he never had, for Harry's sake (and Lupin's) > From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Mon Feb 12 18:01:54 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:01:54 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164882 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > > 6) Any random character is: an unregistered Animagus/impersonating > someone via polyjuice potion/under the Imperius Curse (usually this > situation relates to items 1 or 2). > Ken: I think you are quite wrong to criticize your fellow readers/plot theorists on this one. The three magical techniques you mention are supremely powerful. All three of them have been used to do mischief right under Dumbledore's nose. Readers are not wrong to suspect that they could be used again. The onus is on the author to explain why on Earth they would be left unused, in fact. It would be rather like modern people not using electricity, computers, or automobiles. Oh yeah, we've got them but, I dunno', just too much bother I suppose. The other obvious possibility is that readers are right when they suspect these techniques would appear prominently in the last book. The author has nothing to explain if they are being used. If some very powerful element is introduced and then never used again or is used infrequently it becomes a serious flaw unless an explanation is given. So far I have not heard an explanation that precludes the use of these three again. It may offend you and others to have polyjuice used in every instance where it would be effective but it offends many of the rest of us when a obviously applicable device is not used in every situation where it would advance some character's plan. Will this play end with dozens of loaded but unfired Chekhov guns littering the stage?? Ken From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 12 18:01:08 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:01:08 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164883 > Alla: I still > maintain that whether you ( hypothetical you) consider the possibility of notes being Lily depends on whom you think would matter more in relation to book 7. Carol responds: The notes are all in the same tiny cramped handwriting, the writing in which the HBP (whom we know to be Snape) writes "This book is the property of the Half-Blood Prince. There's not one handwriting for the Potions hints and another for the spells, including Sectumsempra. Also, the handwriting exactly matches the tiny cramped handwriting Teen!Snape uses in his DADA OWL in "Snape's worst Memory." Surely, the whole point of describing his handwriting in that scene (which otherwise merely shows us how dedicated he was to getting every single detail he could remember into his exam answers) was to set us up for the HBP's very similar handwriting and provide a clue to his identity. Surely, Teen!Severus would not have copied "Just shove a Bezoar down their throat" from Lily. That sounds like Snape himself to me, reinforced by the Bezoar lesson on Harry's very first day of Potions class. Why, when we know that Snape is a genius at Potions, should we think for a moment that he copied Lily's notes? We seem the same experimental tendency in the Potions improvements and the invented spells. And Snape has said that he's the Half-Blood Prince. what more do we need? Carol, who will be glad to quote the descriptions of Teen!Snape's handwriting yet again if necessary to show that the notes are not Lily's From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 12 18:24:52 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:24:52 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164884 Carol earlier: > > With regard to the main plot, if one of Harry's Voldie-acquired > > powers is possession, and his method of killing Voldemort is to > > force him through the Veil using Love as his weapon, possessing > > Sirius's body would provide Harry's soul with a means of > > transportation back to the WW. (Voldie's own fractured soul would > > remain behind with his body. He, like Sirius Black, would be truly dead. But Harry's soul would only be, so to speak, along for the > > ride, and he, unlike the others, could return.) > Jen responded: > Why is possession not the darkest of the dark magic in the WW and why, how, could Harry participate in such an experience without deeply harming 'the power the Dark Lord knows not'? The idea of Harry practicing possession runs counter to everything Dumbledore has told him about how he is protected from Voldemort. Possession is a vile power, it's far more invasive and controlling than the Imperius. Carol: How is invading the mind of the evil wizard who needs to be destroyed, making him feel the power of Love that is Harry's chief weapon, "vile"? It's much better, IMO, than murdering him with an Unforgiveable Curse or forcing LV to have his soul sucked out by a Dementor, the only other ways I can think of to kill or destroy a post-Horcrux LV. Harry acquired *powers* (plural) from Voldemort, and he's not going to kill or destroy him via the scar link or using Parseltongue. There has to be some point to JKR's giving Harry peculiar powers that make him uniquely qualified to defeat the Dark Lord. Possession would be a vehicle for "the Power the Dark Lord knows not," a way of getting Love (which we know he can't endure) into Voldemort? Why else have the scene in which he tries and fails to possess Harry in the MoM, driven out by the beautiful and terrible of Love? > Jen: > I like the idea of Harry taking a journey to the Underworld, seeing > the people he loves and who loved him. I feel certain JKR can > accomplish this without having Harry stoop to Voldemort's level to > make this journey. Carol again: Well. at least we're agreed there. Any idea how he could do it without using Voldie's "living" body to get in and Sirius's dead one to get out? I think possession, a power Harry thinks he doesn't have but could well have acquired along with Parseltongue (also viewed by many wizards as a Dark power) would be the perfect means to make this journey without being trapped beyond the Veil himself. > Carol earlier: > > I like this version of events because it gives Sirius Black's death a purpose beyond a lesson in compassion for Harry (understanding thesuffering that others have endured because of Voldemort) by providing a means for Harry to go beyond the Veil and return alive, and it enables Harry to destroy Voldemort through a sacrificial impulse without dying himself or committing murder. > Jen: > JKR has promised Sirius death will be given meaning and I sense the purpose will be much greater and more valuable for the defeat of Voldemort than a personal experience for Harry. All roads lead to Voldemort now and Harry has made a sort of peace with Sirius' death already. Bringing Sirius' body back for a funeral and so the WW will know the truth is rather anticlimatic in my opinion, something the story has moved beyond, not to mention Harry. > Carol: Bringing Sirius's body back (at his request, a la Cedric) would do more than provide the funeral he never had and posthumously clear his name. It would give Harry a means to return from the land of the Dead. Why else would JKR have Sirius die in this particular way? If all Harry needed was the compassion for LV's victims that we both agree that this death provides, why not have Bella AK her dear cousin? Why have her almost accidentally send him beyond the Veil. There's a reason that he died *in this particular way.* And, of course, all roads lead to Voldemort. That's the whole point of having Harry possess him. Better that than committing murder using an evil curse, the Darkest of the Curses except for the one that creates Horcruxes. IMO, of course. I don't want Harry to soil his hands with murder. Possessing Voldie, no doubt instinctively, as he does everything, as an act of desperation and self-defense (perhaps Harry is wandless at this point?) would be highly dramatic and imaginative and would keep his hands clean and his soul unripped--especially if LV *chooses* to go beyond the Veil to escape the pain and power of Harry's sacrificial Love. Carol, understanding that you find possession distasteful but not seeing why possessing Voldie to get him behind the Veil and using Sirius's body to get back wouldn't work to kill Voldie and save Harry, surely the ideal ending for those who want Harry to live From va32h at comcast.net Mon Feb 12 18:30:24 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:30:24 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164885 Ken writes: > I think you are quite wrong to criticize your fellow readers/plot > theorists on this one. The three magical techniques you mention are > supremely powerful. All three of them have been used to do mischief > right under Dumbledore's nose. Readers are not wrong to suspect that > they could be used again. The onus is on the author to explain why on Earth they would be left unused, in fact. It would be rather like > modern people not using electricity, computers, or automobiles. Oh > yeah, we've got them but, I dunno', just too much bother I suppose. > The other obvious possibility is that readers are right when they > suspect these techniques would appear prominently in the last book. > The author has nothing to explain if they are being used. If some very powerful element is introduced and then never used again or is used infrequently it becomes a serious flaw unless an explanation is given. So far I have not heard an explanation that precludes the use of these three again. It may offend you and others to have polyjuice used in every instance where it would be effective but it offends many of the rest of us when a obviously applicable device is not used in every situation where it would advance some character's plan. Will this play end with dozens of loaded but unfired Chekhov guns littering the stage?? va32h here: Well on one level, I would argue that Polyjuice Potion has now been used three times, Animagi have been used twice, and the Imperius Curse has been used twice so those guns are hardly being left unfired. My objection is not to the speculation that either of those elements is ever used again, but at the methodology. Rather that looking at the text and seeing where it leads, "to the extreme" theorists seem to want to start with their fantastical premise and work backward. If a character is seeming to behave OOC, then perhaps Polyjuice Potion is possible reason, providing there is another character with motive to want to impersonate the first, and with sufficient access to Polyjuice Potion. In GoF, we didn't know who Barty Jr. was, but we were given clues that someone in the castle was brewing Polyjuice Potion, and we were given a clue that something unusual happened to Moody shortly before his arrival at Hogwarts. In the case of Rita Skeeter, we had clues that she was obtaining information in unusual circumstances, and the open window, the bug in Hermione's hair, Draco talking to his hand...etc. Those are examples of going where the text leads. Arbitrarily choosing two characters and saying "X is really Y using Polyjuice Potion" is just making things up. Even if one goes back to the text and unearths some "evidence" that if interpreted in just the right light, gives a slight credence to the theory. In the example given in the original post for this thread - Merope gives her powers to Lily Evans. What in the text would suggest such a thing? Nothing. Lily Evans is not even of Merope's generation, so it is logistically impossible. It's inventing a wild premise, for the sake of inventing a wild premise. va32h From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Feb 12 18:33:03 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:33:03 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164886 > Carol responds: > That was what I meant: emotional "closure" for Harry of the sort he > receives from Dumbledore's funeral, and an end to Sirius Black's story > because the WW would finally know that he was a good guy who died > fighting a Death Eater rather than an escaped prisoner and supposed > murderer whose story has never properly been told in the Daily > Prophet. Pippin: Harry could hardly have given a full account of the graveyard without mentioning Peter Pettigrew and how he happened to be alive. I think Sirius's story has been told. I don't know that Harry needs to make a physical journey to the beyond, but if he does, I agree he will need to bring back some kind of token to show it was a real experience, not a vision or a dream. But Sirius's body, intact after two years? That doesn't seem right. Perhaps if it crumbled into dust as soon as it re-entered the world... Pippin From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Feb 12 18:36:24 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 13:36:24 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: Papa Hagrid Message-ID: <2666895.1171305384214.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164887 >Magpie: >As to Hagrid seeing Harry as a son...that's a scary thought to me. >This is Hagrid who gets an illegal dragon egg, shares his crime with >Harry because it's so cool and then 11-year-old Harry has to get him >out of trouble by getting rid of the thing when Hagrid just can't >let go of it? And lets Harry get detention for doing it for him >without admitting his responsibility? (Even GIVES Harry the >detention as if he had nothing to do with how he got there.) Who has >the kids constantly frustrated at his inability to get certain >aspects of his job? Who cries and guilts Harry into things? (Sirius >isn't the only one wanting Harry to leave the safety of the school >to attend to his needs.) Seems to me Harry's accepted that he's got >to be the adult with Hagrid for years now. I suppose this might be >the way Hagrid would relate to his own children as well, but then, >Hagrid has a rather odd relationship with his brother as well. Bart: But that's the whole point: Hagrid does NOT see the world the way everybody else does. Let's take the detention. What would Harry have said, for example, if the detention was to test out a new Quidditch field? From Hagrid's point of view, this is what the detention is; a fun outing disguised as a detention. He just doesn't get it that Harry and Ron might see it differently. And that's the point to Hagrid. He is a good man, but does not see things the same way others do, and does not understand why others would see anything differently. When he does realize this, he overcompensates. Bart From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 12 19:04:17 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:04:17 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164888 Ceridwen wrote: I agree with Carol, too, that Snape is a genius in Potions in > his own right, and doesn't need to have Lily Evans writing in his > Potions text. I don't see why Lily being good at Potions means that > Snape can't be. This may not be what is meant in these discussions, > but sometimes, that's how it reads to me: Lily was the genius, Lily > made the improvements, Lily wrote in Snape's book (Didn't she have a > book of her own?), and so on. I don't think it's an either/or - > either Lily was good at Potions or Snape was. Carol responds: Agreed so far. Besides, the handwriting for the spells, which we *know* that young Snape is invented, is the same as that for the Potions hints, which must also be his. (They're in his book and his handwriting, yet somehow they're Lily's? It does not compute.) Slughorn mentions Lily *only* as the reason he thinks that Harry is doing well in Potions, a reason that the reader (and Harry) know to be wrong. Ironically, the real reason is that he's using Severus Snape's Potions notes without knowing it! If he were using Lily's notes rather than having her genes, where's the irony? And, as Magpie says, what's the point of the whole HBP storyline if the HBP--Potions hints as well as spells--isn't "I, the Half-Blood Prince" Severus Snape? Ceridwen: > I don't see why Lily can't be talented if Snape is. I do think > Slughorn has a soft spot for young Lily. She's bright, she's pretty, she's cheeky, and she's overcome an obstacle of birth to someone like Slughorn, who is genteely prejudiced and not aware at all that he is. Carol: With you so far. There can be little doubt that Slughorn would want to "collect" Lily and add her to the Slug Club. Ceridwen: I don't think, based on what we've seen of Slughorn's collecting, that he gave young Severus much thought. Snape was bright, but he wasn't personable, he was a loner from what we've seen, and he was headed down the wrong path. He was as likely to end up infamous instead of famous if he was noteworthy at all. Carol: Here I differ with you. If he can get past Lily's being a Muggleborn, he can get past Severus's unpleasant personality (which might not have been particularly visible in a class he excelled at taught by his own HoH). I think that, like the young Lucius Malfoy, Slughorn would have spotted Severus's talents and nurtured them. "I taught him. I thought I knew him" indicates something like affection, as does "Even you, Severus." And we don't see any other teacher except, oddly, Trelawney, at Slughorn's Christmas party, where all the attendees are current or former Slug Club members and their dates. (Trelawney could have been a member in her day thanks to her famous great-grandmother Cassandra.) Slughorn at all times treats Snape with respect and affection, putting his arm around his shoulders and dragging him into a conversation with a supposed fellow prodigy. Nor would Severus have shown signs of being a DE when he first showed up at Hogwarts at age eleven knowing all those hexes, which could not have been any worse than his toenail hex or Langlock or Levicorpus. and certainly, being sorted into Slytherin wouldn't count against him. Slughorn was Head of that House. I don't see Sevvie heading down a wrong path until at least sixth year, after the so-called Prank. (The Sectumsempra Spell, marked "for enemies" was in his NEWTs Potions book. And *if* the spell he cast on James, which didn't "cut forever" or require a complex Healing spell to save James from bleeding to death like a hemophiliac with a cut finger, was an early or controlled form of Sectumsempra, that was still late in his fifth year. The other spells are all harmless and easily reversed, as easily used by Hogwarts students as by DEs intent on their idea of a good time. Ceridwen: Though, I also do agree with Carol and someone else, who said that the "Even you, Severus..." sounds like he is speaking about the pinnacle of the students, Snape. Carol: Exactly. And surely Slughorn would want the most brilliant student in both his House and his subject in the Slug Club? Imagine the favors Slughorn would have expected from Snape if he rose to prominence as a researcher at the MoM or St. Mungo's. (*And* he would have known Sevvie's mother, who for all we know was also gifted in Potions.) > Ceridwen, wondering if whatever the connection to Lily is hasn't been under Harry's (and the reader's) nose all along, and wondering what it could be. > Carol: I think it's above his nose (and below his scar)--a pair of green eyes that have been pointed out as resembling Lily's in every book. Of course, they may have served their purpose already in the Slughorn memory incident, but that would be a bit of a letdown after all the build-up. Carol, who thinks that, whatever we have yet to learn about Lily, it isn't that she invented the Potions hints in the HBP's book From shannon at eiramrae.com Mon Feb 12 15:48:00 2007 From: shannon at eiramrae.com (shannon at eiramrae.com) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 06:48:00 -0900 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore in book 7 Message-ID: <20070212154801.4646F13CC0D@ws6-8.us4.outblaze.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164889 Maria wrote: Since DD will be in book 7, would anyone care to give their theories or guesses as to which form DD will be? Shannon: I suspect that the most likely fashion we'll see DD is by his portrait. I like to think that DD will be very useful to Harry in his quest. From cat_batya at yahoo.com Mon Feb 12 17:48:51 2007 From: cat_batya at yahoo.com (Sera Batya) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 09:48:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore in book 7 Message-ID: <476997.88252.qm@web58515.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164890 Maria wrote: Since DD will be in book 7, would anyone care to give their theories or guesses as to which form DD will be? Will he be in a ghost form, which I doubt, or reborn DD like the phoenix, which is also doubtful since Jo said DD will not pull a Gandalf? What do you think guys? cat_batya: My guess is probably going to be way way off, but... I think it will have something to do with the pensieve so that he is neither ghost nor "real". cat_batya From dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 12 17:52:54 2007 From: dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com (dragonkeeper) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 09:52:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Childbirth (was to the extreme) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20070212175254.88755.qmail@web53314.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164891 I think that Hagrid was more astonished by the fact that Lily and James' death at the hands one of the most feared dark wizard was explained so flippantly as a car crash, thus covering up the truth of their last night and sacrifices. As for childbirth, it is dangerous and there are no guarantees in the process. Even today, a simple operation can go wrong. David From cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com Mon Feb 12 18:44:31 2007 From: cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com (Unspeakable) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:44:31 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164892 Very interesting discussion! It's amazing what can grow from a throwaway remark on these boards. :--) Just to clarify a few things in my last post and to respond to some new ideas: a) Carol: Are you taking Slughorn's comments about Lily's natural Potions ability to indicate that Severus's genius wasn't equally natural? Cassy: No, my point here was just to acknowledge that *all* geniuses are made as well as born (good examples, btw)! I think it was being argued by some that the 'many revisions and crossings out' in the Prince's textbook contradicted the idea of instinctive ability. (The implication being that Slughorn had exaggerated Lily's 'intuitive grasp of Potions making'.) Now obviously, *Harry's* 'instinct' was no such thing! No-one could have achieved such spectacular results first time. But from what Slughorn said, Lily possessed the ability to improvise in Potions. And I just think it's interesting that Slughorn repeatedly mentions her *creative* brilliance. I mean, don't you think that Slughorn could have been pleasantly surprised by Harry's skill, "but then your mother was a very good student, delightful girl, Lily Evans", while leaving us in no doubt that Snape was the *outstanding* one (with Lily as his Hermione)? But it seems that they were both outstanding ... only there's no payoff for Lily's talent in HBP, which leaves me feeling slightly cheated on her behalf. (Maybe, Charming!Lily was just a plot device to gain the memory from Slughorn, but surely Charming!Lily didn't have to be *that* good at Potions? Unless we're meant to assume that Slughorn was exaggerating because he liked her face. And that would be *his* sexism, right?! I'd rather believe that Snape & Lily were partners.) b) Magpie: I think that Slughorn was perfectly serious when he said that Lily was good at Potions, and that this could be a connection she had to Snape. Snape could have admired Lily's Potions skill too. What I don't see any evidence for is the leap that Slughorn says Lily was good at Potions means that Lily must be person good at Potions Harry learned from in HBP. That, to me, seems like an odd leap, and one that leads nowhere. Harry already knows Lily was good at Potions ... It just doesn't interest [him] much. Cassy: But isn't *that* odd? Odd, I mean, that Lily's talent should be of such little consequence. Odd too, that we have evidence to suggest that Lily & Snape were both fabulously gifted at Potions (Slughorn described Lily as one of the brightest students he'd ever taught) when they were probably in the same N.E.W.T. class and no-one in Harry's world has even mentioned the possibility that they might have been working together. Now that is odd, IMHO! As for the 'odd leap' you mention, I don't think it's so strange when everything Harry does in Potions seems to remind Slughorn of Lily. Granted, Slughorn is not going to suppose that Harry inherited any talent from Snape, but why does Slughorn need to *keep* referencing Lily at all? If she was just decent at Potions, but her son appears to be brilliant, then one might have thought he would let it drop after a couple of lessons and start praising Harry in his own right? Instead, it's almost like Slughorn is experiencing d?j? vu! "Unorthodox, but what a stroke of inspiration, Harry ... I really don't know where you get these brain waves, my boy ... unless ... it's just your mother's genes coming out in you!" Even the trick with the bezoar strikes him as something Lily would have done: "You've got a nerve, boy! ... Oh, you're like your mother ... well, I can't fault you ... a bezoar would certainly act as an antidote to all these potions!" And then again: "That's the individual spirit a real potion-maker needs!" said Slughorn happily, before Harry could reply. "Just like his mother, she had the same intuitive grasp of potion making, it's undoubtedly from Lily he gets it..." (HBP18) (One has to wonder where Snape *was* when Lily was impressing Slughorn - sitting next to her, perhaps?) c) Carol: how does crediting *Lily* with Severus's Potions improvements help to improve Harry's estimation of Snape's abilities? ... In any case, he's never doubted Snape's Potions abilities. Cassy: That was my point. :--) d) Carol: But to give her [Lily] credit for Snape's brilliance in Potions ... is to take away all the beautiful irony of Harry's learning Potions from Snape without knowing he's Snape and identifying with the young Severus without knowing who he was. Cassy: You make a good point. But there's still the irony of Harry learning DADA from Snape via the Prince ... and I'm not saying that Snape wasn't involved with the Potions improvements, but that he & Lily might have collaborated, which would also be ironic given that Harry currently believes Snape *hated* his mother. "And he didn't think my mother was worth a damn either because she was Muggle-born.... 'Mudblood,' he called her...." (HBP29). e) Magpie: Which doesn't mean that Lily can't be connected to the book. I mean, Harry's relationship with Lily has potential, but it's not yet in any way complicated. Harry thinks Lily's great and learning she was good at Potions and helped him at Potions doesn't really give him anything except that hey, Mum was good at Potions. Cassy: I agree. What *would* be interesting, IMHO, would be for Harry to discover that his mother had a relationship with the Half-Blood Prince, which I think is (partly) the significance of the textbook. Why would Harry's actions be making Slughorn think of Lily when he was following Snape's instructions? Magpie: The HBP being Snape is a turnaround and dramatic -- Harry's freaked out by the idea the person he came to think of as a friend was his most hated enemy. Cassy: Although my point is that all this ultimately achieves is another opportunity for Harry to convict Snape at the end of HBP. He decides that the Prince showed a predisposition for evil & that he (Harry) was a fool not to have seen it before. Thus, the book becomes something of a red herring for those who believe in DDM!Snape. Somehow, Harry has to realize that Snape is actually on his side. Now, I don't think that the Potions book will achieve this ... (I doubt that the book will play a particularly important role in DH) ... but it might just contain the only evidence we have of a Snape/Lily friendship. f) Alla, thinks that Lily making those notes would have a layer of new and delightful irony. Magpie: She's the type of person Harry thinks the voice *should* belong to, so isn't ironic. And in fact it seems to require a convenient dual personality for the HBP. Instead of being the complicated person whom Harry liked but had a dark side, he's comfortably split into the Dark Side being the guy he's always hated and the part he liked being somebody he loves. Cassy: Well, if Snape invented the spells (some of which Harry found very useful) and Snape & Lily were *both* responsible for the Potions, that wouldn't be too bad, IMHO. And I think it *would* be ironic if Hermione turned out to have a point about the Prince's gender, despite being wrong about the handwriting! (Also, if it turns out to be for Lily's sake that Snape protected Harry in front of Slughorn, did he feel that Harry had a right to the book, I wonder?) d) Julie ... thinks Lily might have made a fine Potions Master if she'd wanted it (and had lived), but that doesn't take away in the least from Snape's clear mastery of the subject. Cassy: No, but it might add a poignant touch if Lily had helped Snape to gain that mastery in the first place. (Incidentally, I wonder if we're meant to think that Charms & Potions are related branches of Magic?) JMHO, Cassy V., who doesn't think Lily invented Sectumsempra but who thinks that Snape might have been grudgingly impressed by Lily's trick with a bezoar. (http://book7.co.uk/: evidence-based synopsis) From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Mon Feb 12 20:03:45 2007 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 12:03:45 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] To the Extreme In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16210401421.20070212120345@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164893 Snow: s> What if Voldy's Mom gave her powers away so that she could die? What s> if she gave her powers away to a very young child named Lily? s> Merope's powers would no longer save her from death and allow her to s> die. Lil' Lily would acquire Merope's power and become the first s> witch in the family. Dave: I think a much simpler and more based-on-Canon explanation is that Merope had simply lost the will to live at that point... Maybe she even committed suicide, one dark night when no one was watching -- I assume if a wizard/witch suffers from sufficient self-loathing, turning your wand on yourself and saying "Avada Kedavra" *would* work. And since AK leaves no trace, Mrs. Cole might have come in the next morning and *assumed* she died of childbirth. I think Jo's intention is that Merope's refusal to use magic to save herself, if only for the sake of her son, is meant to sharply contrast Lily's bravery in sacrificing her life to save Harry, and therefore to augment the contrast between Harry and LV themselves. Dave From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Feb 12 20:18:30 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:18:30 -0000 Subject: Sirius' Body - THEORY -Special Circumstances... (was: Dumbledore...bk 7 ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164894 --- "kat7555" wrote: > > Carol responds: > > The point would be to give Sirius Black the proper > > funeral he never received and to give Harry a chance > > to accept his godfather's death as he accepts > > Dumbledore's. It would also provide a chance for the > > WW to be told Black's real story. I don't think the > > MoM ever publicly acknowledged its blunder regarding > > him. To use a jargon term that I hate, bringing > > Sirius's body back would give his story "closure." > Kathy: > > I hope you are correct as well. Sirius was my favorite > character next to Harry and I always felt sympathy for > him being convicted of a crime he didn't commit. I > think Sirius gave Harry the unconditional love that > Harry always needed. He was more willing to share his > home than the Dursley's ever were. I also believe that > Harry was the closest person to a son that Sirius would > ever have. > > Kathy > bboyminn: I've tried to resist, but you have forced me to trot out one of my favorite, though admittedly farfetched and unlikely, theories. But first, some background. Normally when a person dies, his body physically dies and his soul no longer having a body to contain it and give it meaning, leaves the body. The soul then crosses over to the 'other side' - goes 'behind the Veil'; death, separation, then crossing over. Sirius did none of these things. His body didn't die. Both living body and eternal soul crossed over beyond the Veil intact, and I say this constitutes VERY SPECIAL Circumstances. Don't get me wrong, for the moment, Sirius is dead in that he is trapped in the realm of the dead, and can't under any normal circumstances get back. If you are forever trapped in the land of the dead, then you are functionally dead. That's under normal circumstances, so we have to create some Abnormal Circumstances. Carol and I both believe that Harry has additional powers he recieved from Voldemort, power that haven't manifested themselves yet because circumstances haven't forced that manifestation. The power, and critical to this discussion, is the Power of Possession. Harry has the power of possession. I predict that in the climatic battle as an act of desperation, Voldemort will once again possess Harry. Then we have a battle of will-power similar to the battle of wills that occurred when the wands connected. Voldemort will stuggle to retain his Possession of Harry, and Harry will struggle to throw off Voldemort's Possession. In the process, rather than throw Voldemort off, he will reverse the Possession. Harry will possess Voldemort. Now Harry is in control. If he can hold Voldemort in possession, there may be a away he can destroy him, but likely that will mean destroying himself. The only way is to drag himself and Voldemort beyond the Veil. Horcruxes or no Horcruxes, once Voldemort is behind the Veil he is trapped there for eternity, but so is Harry. So is Harry... unless my fertile mind can create a second set of special circumstances, and I'm here to tell you that my warped, twisted, desperate mind can do just that. The special circumstances are that two souls can not cross over as one, and remain beyond the Veil. More simply put, Voldemort and Harry joined as one body and one soul, are not trapped behind the Veil. That means that Harry must separate from Voldemort thereby trapping them both behind the Veil. Too bad we don't have another person who is behind the Veil under 'special circumstances'... BUT WAIT, we do; Sirius. Sirius puts his hand on Harry's body and tells Harry to tranfer possesssion to him. In otherwords, Harry abandons Voldemort thereby trapping him forever behind the Veil, and takes over Sirius's body. Never during the process is Harry ever uniquely alone and therefore trapped in the land of the dead. That's important because if Harry and his soul are ever 'stand alone' behind the Veil then they are all trapped there. Remember that 'two souls in one' is a special exception that I created to make this work, but it only works as long as two souls remain as one. Once souls are individual and separate they are trapped forever. Now Harry and Sirius are joined, Voldemort is trapped and abandon. Sirius and Harry walk back out of the Veil after a tearful goodbye to parents and friends, and to the joyful cheers of waiting friends. As to whether Sirius survives the ordeal, I can go either way. If Sirius survives, then fine, he and Harry can continue their relationship. If by chance Sirius has been behind the Veil too long to survive the return, then at least Harry has the gift of Sirius saving him and giving him a second chance at life, and he has a chance to bury and grieve for Sirius properly. This theory combines so many elements of the plot. The Veil for one, I can't imagine an image as substantial and creepy as the Veil being abandon. It seems that it is too significant not to be used again, even more significant that the 'Locked Room'. It combined the classic Epic Hero's death and rebirth themes. Harry goes beyond the Veil and returns. Harry has the 'power' that Voldemort knows not. In fact, Harry has the power, the power of possession, that nobody knew or anticipated. It allows Harry to kill/vanquish Voldemort without literally having to kill him; no AK curse. Voldemort isn't truly dead, he is alive and well, just eternally trapped behind the Veil. Fan Fic writers will love this as they can fantasize ways of Voldemort coming back. This also invalidates the Horcruxes and allows Harry to win even if the Horcruxes are not all destroyed. Voldemort's soul won't go beyond the Veil on it's own because of the Horcruxes, but I say their existance doesn't prevent Harry from literally dragging Voldemort beyond the Veil and trapping him there. If you must bring the 'Locket Room' into the picture then Harry and/or Sirius are rushed to the room after exiting the Veil in a last ditched attempt to help them recover from their ordeal. Behind the Veil Harry gets to spend some quality time with his parents, family, and Dumbledore. Now, JKR has said that Sirius is dead. Some think that shoots down this theory. However, while I readily admit that Sirius is as good as dead, that for all intent and purpose, is dead. He is dead under 'special circumstances', dead in a way that dead people are NOT dead. Until these additional 'special circumstances' arise, there is ZERO chance of Sirius coming back. So, he can in my scenario be completely dead and yet not dead at the same time. Admittedly, this is fantasy in the extreme, I'm not even remotely going to predict that this will happen. I'm only presenting it as a cool, though admittedly deranged, idea of what could happen. Harry and Sirius behind the Veil and back...under Special Circumstances. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Steve/bboyminn From sam2sar at charter.net Mon Feb 12 20:18:02 2007 From: sam2sar at charter.net (Stephanie) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:18:02 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore in book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164895 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Maria Vaerewyck" wrote: > > Hello, I'm a lurker but I have question which concerns DD in book 7. > > Since DD will be in book 7, would anyone care to give their theories > or guesses as to which form DD will be? Will he be in a ghost form, > which I doubt, or reborn DD like the phoenix, which is also doubtful since Jo said DD will not pull a Gandalf? > > What do you think guys? Thanks to all. > > Maria > Sam here My guess would be the Chocolate frog Cards. They are small, portable and DD mentioned that he didn't want to be taken off of them (right before Harry's trial I think). From aandj at labyrinth.net.au Mon Feb 12 20:23:08 2007 From: aandj at labyrinth.net.au (Jocelyn Grunow) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:23:08 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore in book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164897 On Tuesday, February 13, 2007, at 01:33 am, Maria Vaerewyck wrote: > Since DD will be in book 7, would anyone care to give their theories > or guesses as to which form DD will be? Will he be in a ghost form, > which I doubt, or reborn DD like the phoenix, which is also doubtful > since Jo said DD will not pull a Gandalf? I don't think he will be in it per se, but if we are to get explanations of things like Snape's true loyalties then a large part of such explanations will be concerned with why Dumbledore did what he did. Whether we find out his motivation from letters, paintings, pensieve memories (yes yes, kept in vials of course) or from living characters' expositions doesn't really matter. I think that anyone who actually expects DD to make a living (or ghostly) appearance is going to be disappointed. When JKR said that he was giving her trouble, I think she was wrestling with explaining his past actions. Jocelyn From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Feb 12 20:47:41 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:47:41 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lily & the Potions textbook/Papa Hagrid In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164898 > b) Magpie: I think that Slughorn was perfectly serious when he said > that Lily was good at Potions, and that this could be a connection she > had to Snape. Snape could have admired Lily's Potions skill too. What > I don't see any evidence for is the leap that Slughorn says Lily was > good at Potions means that Lily must be person good at Potions Harry > learned from in HBP. That, to me, seems like an odd leap, and one that > leads nowhere. Harry already knows Lily was good at Potions ... It > just doesn't interest [him] much. > > Cassy: But isn't *that* odd? Odd, I mean, that Lily's talent should be > of such little consequence. Odd too, that we have evidence to suggest > that Lily & Snape were both fabulously gifted at Potions (Slughorn > described Lily as one of the brightest students he'd ever taught) when > they were probably in the same N.E.W.T. class and no-one in Harry's > world has even mentioned the possibility that they might have been > working together. Now that is odd, IMHO! Magpie: I see why the Snape/Lily Potions connection seems like it might go somehwere, but I don't think it's odd Harry doesn't think they must have been friends because of it. Draco and Hermione are both good in Potions, and they don't work together. Cassy: > As for the 'odd leap' you mention, I don't think it's so strange when > everything Harry does in Potions seems to remind Slughorn of Lily. > Granted, Slughorn is not going to suppose that Harry inherited any > talent from Snape, but why does Slughorn need to *keep* referencing > Lily at all? If she was just decent at Potions, but her son appears to > be brilliant, then one might have thought he would let it drop after a > couple of lessons and start praising Harry in his own right? Magpie: It's odd that Slughorn's connecting Harry with his mother, who was an excellent Potions student, is supposed to lead to Lily making up dark spells and writing in Snape's Potions book and be the HBP-- something Snape himself claims to be. Slughorn continues to praise Harry in his own right because Slughorn loved Lily and feels guilty about her when he looks at Harry. And also he tends to always deal with people through connections he already knows. Cassy: Instead, > it's almost like Slughorn is experiencing d?j? vu! "Unorthodox, but > what a stroke of inspiration, Harry ... I really don't know where you > get these brain waves, my boy ... unless ... it's just your mother's > genes coming out in you!" Even the trick with the bezoar strikes him > as something Lily would have done: "You've got a nerve, boy! ... Oh, > you're like your mother ... well, I can't fault you ... a bezoar would > certainly act as an antidote to all these potions!" And then again: > "That's the individual spirit a real potion-maker needs!" said > Slughorn happily, before Harry could reply. "Just like his mother, she > had the same intuitive grasp of potion making, it's undoubtedly from > Lily he gets it..." (HBP18) (One has to wonder where Snape *was* when > Lily was impressing Slughorn - sitting next to her, perhaps?) Magpie: Actually, I don't get "deja vu" there, but the opposite. Lily means a lot to Slughorn and Slughorn loves seeing Lily in Harry's work. According to the answer in HBP Harry is using Snape's notes, which he's come up with after a lot of experimentation. So there's no reason to wonder where Snape was when Lily was being praised, because there's no reason that Lily has to have been writing anything in his book. > Cassy: I agree. What *would* be interesting, IMHO, would be for Harry > to discover that his mother had a relationship with the Half-Blood > Prince, which I think is (partly) the significance of the textbook. > Why would Harry's actions be making Slughorn think of Lily when he was > following Snape's instructions? Magpie: Sure, that could be true--but that means Snape and Lily were friends, not that the HBP was really Lily. > Magpie: The HBP being Snape is a turnaround and dramatic -- Harry's > freaked out by the idea the person he came to think of as a friend was > his most hated enemy. > > Cassy: Although my point is that all this ultimately achieves is > another opportunity for Harry to convict Snape at the end of HBP. He > decides that the Prince showed a predisposition for evil & that he > (Harry) was a fool not to have seen it before. Thus, the book becomes > something of a red herring for those who believe in DDM!Snape. Magpie: Oh, I think it does more than give Harry an opportunity to convict Snape! On the contrary, it gives him the opportunity to defend Snape as an ally throughout the whole book. > Cassy: Well, if Snape invented the spells (some of which Harry found > very useful) and Snape & Lily were *both* responsible for the Potions, > that wouldn't be too bad, IMHO. And I think it *would* be ironic if > Hermione turned out to have a point about the Prince's gender, despite > being wrong about the handwriting! (Also, if it turns out to be for > Lily's sake that Snape protected Harry in front of Slughorn, did he > feel that Harry had a right to the book, I wonder?) Magpie: I think it would be fine if Snape and Lily worked on Potions together, if that's the basis for a friendship that's established in the last book. I just consider that a separate issue from Lily actually being the Prince. If Snape himself was shown to actually be bad at Potions I'd consider that a clue, but he's always seemed really good at Potions. Bart: But that's the whole point: Hagrid does NOT see the world the way everybody else does. Let's take the detention. What would Harry have said, for example, if the detention was to test out a new Quidditch field? From Hagrid's point of view, this is what the detention is; a fun outing disguised as a detention. He just doesn't get it that Harry and Ron might see it differently. And that's the point to Hagrid. He is a good man, but does not see things the same way others do, and does not understand why others would see anything differently. When he does realize this, he overcompensates. Magpie: But why does this make him like a father? Even if he thinks looking for monsters in the forest is fun,Harry and Hermione are still being accused of a crime that was his fault, one that they've also lost a lot of house points for. It still comes down to Hagrid breaking the law and needing Harry to do the right thing, then letting Harry for some reason take care of it instead of himself, then letting Harry and Hermione be falsely accused and lose house points and the goodwill of their house--for which he doesn't apologize and I don't remember him ever acknowledging. I honestly also don't recall him indicating he thought the detention was fun for the kids in his dialogue--he seemed to me like he'd completely forgotten why they had detention. I tend to remember him more often crying and beating his breast over his mistakes (like giving Quirrel the secret to getting past Fluffy) rather than overcompensating when he realized his view of the world is wrong (in fact, it seems like a running joke that he never gets that, so everyone else has to just adjust their behavior around him and look after themselves). What I don't get is what this makes Hagrid's relationships with Harry like that of a father and son, since once again it's all about everyone having to deal with Hagrid's special way of seeing the world. Sirius seems like a far better guardian to me. -m From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Mon Feb 12 21:11:50 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 16:11:50 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore in book 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <003901c74eea$70158200$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 164899 --Maria wrote- >>>Since DD will be in book 7, would anyone care to give their theories > or guesses as to which form DD will be? Will he be in a ghost form, > which I doubt, or reborn DD like the phoenix, which is also doubtful since Jo said DD will not pull a Gandalf? > >> --Sam wrote- >>>My guess would be the Chocolate frog Cards. They are small, portable >and DD mentioned that he didn't want to be taken off of them (right >before Harry's trial I think). >>> --Ronin's Comments- I don't think DD will be a ghost because I don't believe that someone of DD's character would choose that existence. The portrait of DD could be useful, but it is only an impression of what he was in life. It may make commentary on occasion and may act as a spy or messenger, but won't be able to give Harry support in the final battle or much guidance along the way. Chocolate frog cards would be too convenient. As far as I know, they have less capability that even the portraits, but they are portable. I don't recall any of the cards ever speaking though. Somebody mentioned the pensieve. This is where I think DD will play a part in DH. Much the same way as a parent with a terminal illness would make recordings for their newborn baby. As the baby grows, it can watch the recordings and get a sense of who it's parents were, learn life lessons that the parent left behind or just to know that they were loved, etc. I don't think DD left the messages in the pensive for just anyone to see, but would have stored them in vials (as he did in HBP) so that Harry could see them at the right time. He could've left them at 12 Grimauld Place, since Kreacher was sent to Hogwarts and Mundungus would not disturb them. The vials would contain whatever DD thought was important to Harry's success. They could be more memories about Voldemort, memories of why he trusted Snape, advice about destroying the horcruxes or where they may be or even lessons in powerful magic. This is based on the premise that DD knew he would die and was preparing for it as I believe was the case in HBP. His hand was not healing well and every time we saw him, he seemed more tired and weak. There are also several comments made throughout HBP, where he talks about his age, mortality and weaknesses, etc. I believe DD would have wanted to pass on as much as he could to help Harry and this would be the best way to achieve that. The phoenix theory is also very intriguing. It's mentioned so frequently throughout the series that it must fit in somehow. But I don't see DD being reborn and just turning up somewhere in all of his glory. The phoenix is reborn from it's ashes, but is reborn as a baby. Maybe DD is going to rise from the ashes, but as a baby which will need to grow to maturity before he can do anything to help the order. This would be DD's back up plan in case Harry had failed. Like Lord Voldemort, Dumbledore seemed to be quite taken by the search for immortality. He knew about horcruxes, but wanted to find an alternative way that didn't require such dark means. So, he studied the old magics, the phoenix, maybe some of the things in the DoM, such as the "thing" which turned the DE's head into a baby's head, etc. He also knew about unicorn's blood and helped Nicholas Flamel with the Sorcerer's Stone. It's safe to say he had an interest in the subject and it's quite possible that he intended to exercise one of his theories. These are my thoughts and ramblings on the matter of Dumbledore in book 7. From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Mon Feb 12 22:30:34 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:30:34 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] To the Extreme In-Reply-To: <16210401421.20070212120345@mindspring.com> References: <16210401421.20070212120345@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <948bbb470702121430m174604e1kd221f5887ac028b1@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164900 Snow: s> What if Voldy's Mom gave her powers away so that she could die? What s> if she gave her powers away to a very young child named Lily? s> Merope's powers would no longer save her from death and allow her to s> die. Lil' Lily would acquire Merope's power and become the first s> witch in the family. Dave: d>I think a much simpler and more based-on-Canon explanation is that d>Merope had simply lost the will to live at that point... Maybe she d>even committed suicide, one dark night when no one was watching -- d>I assume if a wizard/witch suffers from sufficient self-loathing, d>turning your wand on yourself and saying "Avada Kedavra" *would* d>work. And since AK leaves no trace, Mrs. Cole might d>have come in the next morning and *assumed* she died of childbirth. d>I think Jo's intention is that Merope's refusal to use magic to save d>herself, if only for the sake of her son, is meant to sharply contrast d>Lily's bravery in sacrificing her life to save Harry, and therefore to d>augment the contrast between Harry and LV themselves. Dave -------------------------------------- Jeremiah: Dave, I hate to try and make things even more simplistic for you (but I think you'll agree) that if Tom M. Riddle was @ Hogwarts 50 years before CoS, then he was a teen-ager. (Around 15? 16?) so, Harry is 12 during Cos and LV (Tom M. Riddle) would be... 66? 65? So, the only way Lily Potter would have been able to take Meropa's "powers" would be if Lily was at least the exact same age as LV and that would mean Lily had Harry when seh was... (drumroll...) 53 years old. Sorry, Snow. I just can't buy it. Also, we know for a fact that Lily went to Hogwarts at the same time as Sirius, Snape, Lupin and James. I believe that Lupin is in his 30's? There is a 30+ year gap to be accounted for. No, Dave, I totally agree with your reasoning for Meropa's non-use of magic. JKR said that Dd is usually not far from the mark and so I'll have to go with DD's "assumptions." They'll be closer that having Lily gain Meropa's powers. Also, Snow... we don't know if Lil' Lily is the "first witch in the family." Maybe it skipped generations? Maybe she is the first... ever. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Mon Feb 12 23:53:11 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:53:11 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1-5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164901 I am very much afraid our Severus is toast, whichever side he may be on. And I am far from certain Harry won't be responsible for his death - which will be a heck of a thing for him to live with if Snape turns out to be a good guy, (as I believe he will). Severus' one sterling virtue is his extraordinary courage. For sheer, cold nerve he is without match in the Wizarding world - except for Harry. It's the one trait they have in common. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 00:37:16 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:37:16 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Portraits Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164902 People are discussing portraits in various threads. I don't have a specific reply to any of those threads, but I think there is an aspect of Portraits that people are overlooking and it is that aspect that I want to point out because I think it is important. My theory on portraits, as has been posted here many times before, is that they are like actors playing a role on stage. For those who don't know, Hal Holbrook does a one man stag show where he portrays Mark Twain. Mr, Holbrook knows Twain inside and out, and when in costume, he brings Mr. Twain back to life. But there is a limit. On stage, at personal appearances, he portrays Mark Twain very accurately. He affects Twain personality to near perfection, but his only wisdom is the written wisdom of Mark Twain. He can't think orignal Mark Twain thoughts. There is a limit to his depth of character. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Holbrook Now, let us look at the only two portraits we see outside Hogwarts that are not Headmasters. There is the Healing Wizard that chases Ron through St. Mungo's telling Ron about his horrible skin affliction. Not very fully realized. He is stuck tightly in his role of a healer from a distant past. He is stuck saying the types of things this healer would be likely to say, and doing things he would likely do. But he doesn't seem to engage in inteligent dialog they way the headmasters do. He isn't completely draw. He is not a character, but a caricature; a /cartoon/ of his former self. The second is Mrs. Black, no need to explain how unrealized she is. She is trapped in catch phrases and is again not a realized character, but a caricature of her former self. Now we have the Headmaster's Portraits, these are more realized. True they have the character and personality of the people they represent, but they are able to go beyond that, and there is a reason why these particular protraits are not /cartoon/ versions of themselves relative to their character and personality. JKR has said in an interview that the Headmaster Portraits are unique. The Headmasters leave an imprint of themselves on Hogwarts. Some faint essense of who they were and what they did there. That faint essense enhances their portraits and gives them the power of dialog and conversation, and of thoughtful analysis. True they are not even remotely as realized as their original selves, but they are far more realized than the normal mundane portraits. Because of this, I think Dumbledore's portrait will be of some help. He will be capable of limited analysis and contemplation. He will not be as complete as Dumbledore, but neither will he be a /cartoon/ character like Mrs. Black, The St. Mungo's Healer, or Sir Cadagon - the Knight. If there ever was a cartoon character it is Sir Cadagon. Why? Because Sir Cadagon was never Headmaster. He was never as tightly and intimately tied to Hogwarts as the Headmasters are. So, after this long winded rant, all I am really saying is the we need to remember that Headmaster Portraits are MORE than normal magical portriats. They have greater dept, but none the less, there is a very real limit to their depth. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 01:02:58 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 01:02:58 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 (Was: It's more complex than that....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164903 > > Alla: > > > > But why Harry would not be able to find another way back? > > Carol: > Maybe, but why not use the means available? Two superfluous bodies > (Sirius Black's and Voldie's), one superfluous soul (Harry's). Using > Black's body would make it (as opposed to Voldie's) available for > burial (and his reputation available for vindication) and it would > provide a means for Harry to escape the Underworld and return to his > own body. What other way would you prefer, assuming that I'm right > about the two-way trip behind the Veil and back? Alla: Because I completely agree with Jen and consider possession power darkest of dark somewhere around on AK level, so I would not want Harry to use it. If it is done on subconscious level, it is one thing, but I do not want Harry to spend one second thinking about using it. That is why I prefer another way for trip to underworld, if it is about to happen. As I said, I really really like Steve's theory, even though I do realise that it is not going to happen, but you will have to forgive me that I will still keep that tiny hope, hehe, till I read the book 7. But on the more **realistic** level, meaning that I know that Sirius does not come back, and do not want Harry to use possession, I was thinking that trip to underworld will start differently than you suggest. I was thinking that Harry pushes Voldemort through the veil and slips to it himself, meaning body and soul. Oh, and since he has his body, he does find his way back, after seeing his loved ones, etc. For details ask JKR :) Maybe Sirius will be his guide till the last moment in the veil, then says his goodbyes and goes back to James and Lily or something like that. > Carol, who certainly wasn't thinking about "digging Sirius's grave," > only about giving him the funeral he never had, for Harry's sake (and > Lupin's) > > > Alla: Right, I said that I am sure you did not mean it that way, it just felt like that to me, still does feel like that. Sort of unintended consequences of the theory, LOL. Sirius had been gone for two years, I think that closure can be done on spiritual level now, without his body brought back. That is of course just speculation and you can be right or me, or none of us and trip to underworld will not happen at all. But I do hope that you are wrong about Sirius body brought back. I really do. Pippin: > Harry could hardly have given a full account of the graveyard without > mentioning Peter Pettigrew and how he happened to be alive. I > think Sirius's story has been told. Alla: Probably, except there is that promise by JKR to learn more about Prank, so if nothing else, I am not sure we can say that Sirius story is finished. Pippin: > I don't know that Harry needs to make a physical journey to the > beyond, but if he does, I agree he will need to bring back some kind > of token to show it was a real experience, not a vision or a dream. > But Sirius's body, intact after two years? That doesn't seem right. > Perhaps if it crumbled into dust as soon as it re-entered the world... Alla: Agreed completely about body not being intact after two years, although who knows, magic can be useful plot device, LOL. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Feb 13 02:07:09 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 02:07:09 -0000 Subject: Sirius' body WAS:Re: Dumbledore in book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164904 Carol: > How is invading the mind of the evil wizard who needs to be > destroyed, making him feel the power of Love that is Harry's chief > weapon, "vile"? It's much better, IMO, than murdering him with an > Unforgiveable Curse or forcing LV to have his soul sucked out by a > Dementor, the only other ways I can think of to kill or destroy a > post-Horcrux LV. Jen: Harry will take over Voldemort's will, control him more completely than if he used the Imperius and 'force' him to feel love in order to destroy him? Love is not Harry's weapon, it's what protects him from Voldemort's invasions and from becoming like Voldemort. Harry doesn't control this power, the power propels *him* to save others and value their lives above his own. There is another way introduced--the locked room--which conveniently holds the power Harry is full of and which Voldemort 'detests'. Perfectly in keeping with all the knowledge Dumbledore has passed on to him, Harry could realize this power is Voldemort's greatest weakness and is capable of destroying him while at the same time Harry will be protected. Whether this turns out to be the way the story ends or not, I belive it is consistent with everything Dumbledore has told Harry so far. Carol: > Harry acquired *powers* (plural) from Voldemort, and he's not going > to kill or destroy him via the scar link or using Parseltongue. > There has to be some point to JKR's giving Harry peculiar powers > that make him uniquely qualified to defeat the Dark Lord. Jen: Dumbledore already explained the powers Harry was given by Voldemort, the 'weapons', the 'tools for the job' as he called them in HBP: 'It is Voldemort's fault that you were able to see into his thoughts, his ambitions, that you even understand the snakelike language in which he gives orders, and yet, Harry, despite your privileged insight into Voldemort's world...you have never been seduced by the Dark Arts...' (chap. 23, Horcruxes) Even without a specific name for what Harry is doing there, Dumbledore directly states Voldemort gave Harry this ability when he attempted to kill him. It's not the power of possession given the descriptions so far. Carol: > Possession would be a vehicle for "the Power the Dark Lord knows > not," a way of getting Love (which we know he can't endure) into > Voldemort? Why else have the scene in which he tries and fails to > possess Harry in the MoM, driven out by the beautiful and terrible > of Love? Jen: Because it's one of the most moving scenes in the series and explains exactly what separates Harry from Voldemort: That Voldemort forces himself upon people, causes them excruciating pain and takes over their will while Harry, instead of hating Voldemort for causing this pain or succumbing to his will, feels his heart open with emotion for a man he loved and lost and wishes to be with again more than anything. Carol again: > Any idea how he could do it without using Voldie's "living" body to > get in and Sirius's dead one to get out? Jen: No one would pay me billions of dollars for my imagination , so the best I can come up with is Luna may know something about the Veil, perhaps something gained from her mom who was supposed to be a powerful witch. I don't have to see Harry go down in the Underworld even though I believe it would be moving. Rowling said OOTP was Harry's burning day in a sense, his darkest hour, and like the phoenix he would rise stronger than before. So in my mind he has already gone figuratively into the Underworld whether he takes the journey behind the Veil or not. Carol: > If all Harry needed was the compassion for LV's victims that we > both agree that this death provides, why not have Bella AK her dear > cousin? Why have her almost accidentally send him beyond the Veil. > There's a reason that he died *in this particular way.* Jen: Actually, what made Harry amazing to Dumbledore from the beginning was his inherent compassion for Voldemort's victims. Harry went after the Stone because he knew Voldemort would resume destroying lives as he'd done before. So I don't believe Sirius' death brought forth some compassion Harry wasn't fully capable of before. If anything it hardened his heart even more toward Snape. And regarding the way Sirius died, I like Rowling's description here: 'What I was trying to do with the death in this book was that I wanted to show how very arbitrary and sudden death is. This is a death with no big deathbed scene ? it happens almost accidentally.'(Royal Albert Hall 2003) I read that to mean she didn't want an AK or something more definitive, she wanted an almost accidental death scene as if it didn't really happen. And we see Harry doesn't believe it and runs around the Veil to the other side. > Carol, understanding that you find possession distasteful but not > seeing why possessing Voldie to get him behind the Veil and using > Sirius's body to get back wouldn't work to kill Voldie and save > Harry, surely the ideal ending for those who want Harry to live. Jen: I would say rather than distasteful I find it morally inconsistent with what Dumbledore has told Harry and with Harry's actions so far. I'm better able to see Steve's version in that respect, where Harry's power repels Voldemort and almost accidentally takes LV over in an echo of what happened with the brother wands or even with the Occlumency lessons. The main problem I see with this version is why Voldemort would attempt to possess Harry again after finding out he can't reside in Harry's body. Jen R. From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Tue Feb 13 03:47:50 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 03:47:50 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164905 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > > > va32h here: > > Well on one level, I would argue that Polyjuice Potion has now been > used three times, Animagi have been used twice, and the Imperius > Curse has been used twice so those guns are hardly being left > unfired. > Ken: Yes, they have been fired, they have been extremely effective, and they are still loaded. Try to imagine a World War 1 where both sides fired three belts of machine gun ammunition, three artillery shells, three clips of rifle ammunition, and then resorted to fist fighting for the duration of the war. Effective techniques are not used three times and then dropped, They are used continuously until they become ineffective and they they continue in use until something is developed that can take their place. Polyjuice isn't overused, it is way, way underused. People who try to solve every problem with polyjuice are doing exactly what humans would do in these circumstances. It is the author who is being artificial and unrealistic. Think about it. Rita fooled everyone except Hermione. Dumbledore did not catch fake Moody until most of the damage had been done. Nobody caught Rosemerta, Draco confessed. Such powerful techniques fool the best minds in the wizarding world and compromise the security of one of the highest security places in England and they are only "fired" once, twice, three times? Uh, uh, that just isn't realistic. Polyjuice would be used in every circumstance where it could lend an advantage and so far we have not seen it fail. > My objection is not to the speculation that either of those elements > is ever used again, but at the methodology. > > Rather that looking at the text and seeing where it leads, "to the > extreme" theorists seem to want to start with their fantastical > premise and work backward. > Ken: And that is exactly how many real world problems are solved. It is a very powerful technique in science, technology, and analysis. Did you know that the electronics industry that produced the computer you are typing on is based on such a fiction? Negative numbers have no square root, it is undefined. On day some mathematicians decided for argument's sake to define the square root of -1 as i, the imaginary number. Working backwards from that fantastical premise what do you get? You get an entire new branch of mathematics that has extremely powerful applications in science and engineering. Modern electrical engineering as we know it is founded on this fiction. I don't put much stock in this particular theory for the reason that there seems no means for Merope to have transferred anything to Lily. But some aspects of the theory might have application elsewhere, the notion is an interesting one. Working backwards from a result, real or assumed, is a valid technique. And if the author is not going to show us more appllications of the techniques you say are overused, she owes us reasons why not. There is a saying among dog trainers that dogs only do what works. The same is true of people, if these techniques work so well in the Potterverse then why aren't people using them more? Ken From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 13 04:32:12 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:32:12 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: To the Extreme References: Message-ID: <005601c74f27$f044d470$e59e400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164906 > va32h here: > > Well on one level, I would argue that Polyjuice Potion has now been > used three times, Animagi have been used twice, and the Imperius > Curse has been used twice so those guns are hardly being left > unfired. > Ken: > > And that is exactly how many real world problems are solved. It is > a very powerful technique in science, technology, and analysis. > Did you know that the electronics industry that produced the > computer you are typing on is based on such a fiction? Negative > numbers have no square root, it is undefined. On day some > mathematicians decided for argument's sake to define the > square root of -1 as i, the imaginary number. Working backwards > from that fantastical premise what do you get? You get an > entire new branch of mathematics that has extremely > powerful applications in science and engineering. Modern > electrical engineering as we know it is founded on this fiction. Magpie: I've got to go with va32h on this one. However helpful this sort of thing is in science or electrical engineering, what she's describing in the way it's used to prove theories is that people start with a fantasic premise and then make canon fit it, explaining things away or re-interpreting stuff in a way that's not likely given its original context, or is barely meaningful even in this context. It would be fine to start with an idea and see if it worked, but usually that's not what happens, because fiction can be re-interpreted and theories can also be re-shaped to answer any challenge. Like, in this theory Merope was supposed to have passed her magic to Lily when she died, only the two characters weren't ever on the planet at the same time. That ought to nip the theory in the bud right there. Instead Lily's mother becomes a possibility--and now the burden of proof is shifted, as if it's up to listeners to prove the theory couldn't happen instead of the theorist proving the theory did happen. The theory's just focused on how to make it (the theory) work as a story in its own right, not looking for action stuff in the story (for instance, the fact that Voldemort says he sees a physical resemblance between himself and Harry is part of the theory without explaining why having someone else's magic transferred to you (somehow) would make your two sons look alike physically. -m From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 12:06:05 2007 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewyck) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:06:05 -0000 Subject: Thank You (Re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: <003901c74eea$70158200$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164907 I snipped everything in here including the question I posted yesterday. I just want to say thank you to everyone who shared their thoughts or theories as to in what form DD will be appear in book 7. It helped a lot. I know DD's portrait will be there and with Steve explanations on his "Thoughts on Portraits," it did make sense since we know that DD was talking or having intellectual discussion with the headmasters portraits in his office when nobody's around. There's proof on this in one of the books when Harry went to DD's office, he heard whisperings or voices inside but when he went in DD was alone in his office and the portraits were all pretending to be sleeping. But I have to remember that Harry may not be going back to Hogwarts in book 7 and with this thought we have to remember as well that the pensieve is also in Hogwarts. How would the portrait of DD be of help to him if he isn't going back to Hogwarts? Where is he going to find another portrait? Also, how is he going to use the pensieve if he isn't going to Hogwarts, unless of course somebody will give or bring it to him? I am thinking and hoping that there would be more than just the portrait and the pensieve for DD to appear in book 7 to be able to help or give advice to Harry, one that would not include going back to Hogwarts just to talk to the portrait or use the pensieve, though I don't know what it is. There, I finally said it out loud, this has been in my mind far to long now. Thank you again everyone. Cheers. Maria From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 15:09:24 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 15:09:24 -0000 Subject: Thank You (Re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164908 Maria wrote: > But I have to remember that Harry may not be going back to > Hogwarts in book 7 and with this thought we have to remember as well > that the pensieve is also in Hogwarts. How would the portrait of DD > be of help to him if he isn't going back to Hogwarts? Where is he > going to find another portrait? Also, how is he going to use the > pensieve if he isn't going to Hogwarts, unless of course somebody > will give or bring it to him? > > I am thinking and hoping that there would be more than just the portrait and the pensieve for DD to appear in book 7 to be able to help or give advice to Harry, one that would not include going back to Hogwarts just to talk to the portrait or use the pensieve, though I don't know what it is. There, I finally said it out loud, this has been in my mind far to long now. Carol responds: I would bet money that Harry is going back to Hogwarts even if he doesn't attend as a student. Why have McGonagall discuss the question of whether Hogwarts will stay open in front of Harry if Hogwarts has no more role in the books? We have, first, that quotation from an old interview that I posted the other day: "He [Harry]'s going to be at Hogwarts for seven years. In the seventh book he'll turn 17. In my wizarding world, you come of age at 17. So in book seven he'll be allowed to use magic outside school." http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/#article:9483 Harry is "going to be at Hogwarts for seven years." How much clearer than that can you get? Moreover, Harry's predictions frequently turn out to be untrue. How many times has he thought he was going to die on the spot? And if "He would never forgive Snape. Never!" (admittedly the narrator's paraphrase but still Harry's own thought) turns out to be true, I'll eat Buckbeak. Reasons to go back, aside from the portraits and the Pensieve? He left his Invisibility Cloak on the Astronomy Tower and the HBP's Potions book (which he may decide that he wants again, if only to find out more about the supposedly evil Snape) in the RoR. The RoR itself could prove useful (that tiara was mentioned for a reason, IMO--in fact, two tiaras are mentioned in HBP. Why?). So could the Mirror of Erised. Hagrid is at Hogwarts, and Harry will surely want to visit him. Aberforth is in Hogsmeade, and we're almost certain to learn more about and from him (JKR has promised to tell us more about the Order member we don't really know yet and about DD's family). Slughorn, too, could prove useful since he knows about the Horcruxes and knew Tom Riddle as a boy. McGonagall will probably prove useful to the story in some way. (I hope her cat Animagus form finally comes in handy. Or maybe she'll talk HRH into returning to school?) Trelawney is still there (where else can she go?) and if Prophecies come in threes, she's due to give us (via Harry) a third real Prophecy. JKR mentioned a scene involving house-elves, and the only house-elves we know are at Hogwarts. (I suppose Harry could summon Kreacher to and from Hogwarts, but surely he won't want Kreacher to live with him at 12 GP. I think he'll stay at Hogwarts with Dobby, and all those other Hogwarts house-elves are there, too. Imagine them suddenly unemployed because DD is gone and the school isn't open!) I think that Ginny will attend Hogwarts, even if HRH don't, and be their intermediary via the mirror, along with Phineas, who has portraits in both Hogwarts and 12 GP. And the Hogwarts ghosts have a role to play, too, probably. (They have an advantage over the DEs in that they can't be killed. So does Peeves, for that matter. Surely, he's in the books to do more than drop water balloons at the students and unscrew light fixtures to annoy Umbridge?) Hogwarts has been the primary setting for six books, to the extent that it's almost a character in its own right. I can't imagine JKR abandoning it and all its colorful cast of characters. Sad enough to lose Potions Master/DADA Professor Snape. Carol, trying and failing to imagine a Harry Potter book without Hogwarts From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Tue Feb 13 15:29:03 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 15:29:03 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: <005601c74f27$f044d470$e59e400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164909 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > > Magpie: > I've got to go with va32h on this one. However helpful this sort of thing is > in science or electrical engineering, what she's describing in the way it's > used to prove theories is that people start with a fantasic premise and then > make canon fit it, explaining things away or re-interpreting stuff in a way > that's not likely given its original context, or is barely meaningful even > in this context. It would be fine to start with an idea and see if it > worked, but usually that's not what happens, because fiction can be > re-interpreted and theories can also be re-shaped to answer any challenge. > Ken: But that is not how it works and to condemn a technique because it has occasionally, or frequently, been misused is wrong. It is perfectly fine to start with a fantastic premise and work backwards. When you get to the point where you realize that Merope and Lily were not alive at the same time you give up or try to patch up the theory. The uglier your patch job becomes, the less likely your theory is. At some point if the theory just can't be made to fit reality (or canon) with a reasonably simple extension of your theory you do have to stop. *But you save the broken pieces of your theory because they might be useful later!* To stop before expending a reasonable effort on patching is to risk overlooking a potential solution. This isn't ordinary literary analysis at this point. The work is incomplete and people are trying to guess where the author might head next. When dealing with unknowns the scientific method is a good tool, that is precisely what it was invented for. If you assume that nothing will happen in DH that has not been hinted at in canon and if you assume that the "standard" reading of canon correctly identifies all the hints that are there you are assuming that there will be no surprises in DH. I find that very unlikely. As unlikely as Merope passing her powers to Lily. > Like, in this theory Merope was supposed to have passed her magic to Lily > when she died, only the two characters weren't ever on the planet at the > same time. That ought to nip the theory in the bud right there. Instead > Lily's mother becomes a possibility--and now the burden of proof is shifted, > as if it's up to listeners to prove the theory couldn't happen instead of > the theorist proving the theory did happen. The theory's just focused on how > to make it (the theory) work as a story in its own right, not looking for > action stuff in the story (for instance, the fact that Voldemort says he > sees a physical resemblance between himself and Harry is part of the theory > without explaining why having someone else's magic transferred to you > (somehow) would make your two sons look alike physically. > But that is just part of the patch job that usually is needed to complete any theory, or to advance it to the point where it can be completed without the patch. You don't want to consider the possibility that Merope could have passed her powers to Lily's mother. By refusing to consider that possibility you throw away an entire line of "research" without giving it proper consideration. It has never been explained why splitting your soul makes you look snakelike. It has never been explained how Voldemort transferred some of his power to Harry. It has never been explained how Muggle couples occasionally have magical children. And yet all of those are found in canon. This fantastical theory combines some elements of all those and so it does have some grounding in canon. The real test of any theory is whether it allows the system under study to be explained and whether it allows predictions to be made that can be confirmed by observations. At this point in time all we can do is to run thought experiments. The experimental results will only be available with the release of DH and most of our wacky theories will be disproven. Maybe every single one of them. It goes with the territory. Personally I'd rather read fantastical theories about the plot that to discuss Molly's failures as a woman/wife/mother. But surely a list this size is big enough for all us. If you don't enjoy this kind of speculation that is fine, I'm just trying to help you see that some of us do enjoy it and that it isn't a silly way to try to unravel the plot. Ken From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 16:34:56 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 16:34:56 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164910 Ken wrote: > > But that is not how it works and to condemn a technique because it has occasionally, or frequently, been misused is wrong. It is perfectly fine to start with a fantastic premise and work backwards. When you get to the point where you realize that Merope and Lily were not alive at the same time you give up or try to patch up the theory. The uglier your patch job becomes, the less likely your theory is. At some point if the theory just can't be made to fit reality (or canon) with a reasonably simple extension of your theory you do have to stop. *But you save the broken pieces of your theory because they might be useful later!* To stop before expending a reasonable effort on patching is to risk overlooking a potential solution. > > This isn't ordinary literary analysis at this point. The work is incomplete and people are trying to guess where the author might head next. When dealing with unknowns the scientific method is a good tool, that is precisely what it was invented for. If you assume that nothing will happen in DH that has not been hinted at in canon and if you assume that the "standard" reading of canon correctly identifies all the hints that are there you are assuming that there will be no surprises in DH. I find that very unlikely. Carol responds: Of course here's a difference between literary analysis and speculation. Literary analysis starts with the text, examines it to find out what it may mean or imply, draws a tentative conclusion, and then returns to the text to support that conclusion. Although the conclusion is not definitive--it remains an interpretation--it can at least be supported with evidence from the text and stand up to counterarguments, or it can be modified if it turns out to be flawed. (Look at the various interpretations of "Spinner's End" or Dumbledore's words in the cave or the events on the tower for examples.) Speculation starts with "what if" and scrambles frantically thtough the text to find any bit of evidence (Tom Riddle and Harry look a little bit alike) to support it. Speculation is fun while the seventh book is still unpublished but probably pointless after that. Literary analysis of any book worth rereading is always profitable. Sharing ideas, refining our own interpretations based on the reactions of others, is an intellectual exercise that increases not only our understanding of the HP books but our capacity for interpreting and appreciating other books as well. (Of course, we can continue to speculate on aspects of the story that JKR doesn't cover--homelife at the Blacks when Sirius and Regulus were young, for example, or the friendship between Dobby and Winky before they were both "freed"--but that way fanfic lies. It doesn't help us figure out what *is* there.) Even speculation should start with a thorough knowledge of canon. Tom Riddle's black hair cmes from his father, not from Merope. Harry's black hair comes from James, not from Lily. Lily's mother was a Muggle, with whom it's highly unlikely that Merope had any contact and who is now dead. Besides, if Merope had given Lily's mother her powers (an unprecedented act unless we count Vapormort's accidentally giving Harry some of his powers at GH), Lily's mother, a noncharacter so far, would be a witch, not a Muggle, which would make nonsense of Lily's being a Muggleborn whose parents were "proud to have a witch in the family." I can speculate that Sirius Black and Severus Snape are somehow related based on the similarity of their descriptions (noses aside), positing that the Princes must have been purebloods (Severus was *the* Half-Blood Prince) and explaining the lack of mention of the Princes in the tapestry scene in OoP by noting the size of the tapestry (it goes back many generations) and Harry's unfamiliarity with the name at the time. (He might even have overlooked the name Snape if the relationship was far enough back, but now we know that it wouldn't be on there because Tobias was a Muggle.) But where will that speculation lead me? What's the point? I think they must have been related at some point, but does it really matter? It's unlikely that JKR will think it important enough to mention. I can also speculate that Amycus and Alecto are the Carrows and Brutal-Face is Yaxley (all mentioned by Snape as DEs who pleaded the Imperius Curse). That one is more likely to be either confirmed or disproved in DH since the DEs will probably reappear in Daily Prophet accounts or actual scenes, but it isn't really important (just a detail I picked up on and am trying to put into place). As you say, there are all sorts of unanswered questions in the books on which we can provide speculative answers (why Voldemort becomes more snakelike after his fifth Horcrux, for example, or why Blaise Zabini is mentioned as lolling against a column in the Hog's Head when Draco is in detention with McGonagall or whether Draco actually cast the Imperius Curse that controlled Rosmerta). If JKR considers those details to be important, she'll explain them. If not, we can still provide explanations that fit with our own interpretation of canon, but it will be nothing more than an amusing exercise in creativity, different from actually analyzing the text to determine the motivation of a character or the influence of one character on another or whether some object (say the Invisibility Cloak) has symbolic value or when the narrator can or can't be trusted. As for whether Merope gave away her powers to Lily or Lily's mother, there's not a shred of evidence. All we know is that she either lost her powers or chose not to use them. Even Dumbledore doesn't know which. We can tie that incident in with Tonks's apparent loss of her Metamorphmagus powers in HBP and her changed Patronus. That might be a more productive avenue for speculation. But chances are, those questions will end with DH, either answered definitively or dropped as insignificant. So speculate away. Will Polyjuice be used again? When? How? By whom? Try to second-guess JKR if you can. (I don't know about you, but I certainly never anticipated that Draco would Polyjuice Crabbe and Goyle into first-year girls, any more than I expected Snape to kill Dumbledore.) It's fun. And I'm sure you're right that JKR will use previously introduced devices whose possibilities haven't yet been exhausted. Either that or she'll leave a lot of Chekhov's guns lying around (the flying motorcycle and flying Ford Anglia, the Acromantulae, the ghosts, Dumbledore's and Ron's watches, etc., etc., etc.). But let's at least confine our speculation to what's plausible within the secondary world JKR has constructed. As for me, I prefer literary analysis, even of an incomplete text, to speculation any day, if only because its lifespan is not so limited. Carol, who thinks there's a place for both kinds of posts on this list and is merely expressing her preferences and opinions on the subject From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 13 16:54:39 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 16:54:39 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164911 Magpie: > > Like, in this theory Merope was supposed to have passed her magic to > Lily > > when she died, only the two characters weren't ever on the planet at > the > > same time. That ought to nip the theory in the bud right there. Instead > > Lily's mother becomes a possibility--and now the burden of proof is > shifted, > > as if it's up to listeners to prove the theory couldn't happen > instead of > > the theorist proving the theory did happen. The theory's just > focused on how > > to make it (the theory) work as a story in its own right, not > looking for > > action stuff in the story (for instance, the fact that Voldemort > says he > > sees a physical resemblance between himself and Harry is part of the > theory > > without explaining why having someone else's magic transferred to you > > (somehow) would make your two sons look alike physically. Ken: > But that is just part of the patch job that usually is needed to > complete any theory, or to advance it to the point where it can be > completed without the patch. You don't want to consider the > possibility that Merope could have passed her powers to Lily's mother. > By refusing to consider that possibility you throw away an entire line > of "research" without giving it proper consideration. Magpie: We're not talking about areas of research or science. This is not a real world. If we're talking about predicting where the author is going, all these "patches" needed to complete the theory (i.e., to make the fanfic story you're writing fit with canon) are getting your further from canon, not closer to it (just from the few things discussed already we've got problems with canon--people either can't have the ages they do or else Lily can't be Muggleborn, both things important to the story-so what's it telling us about canon?). It's perfectly reasonable, if we're predicting where the *author* is going, to ask why we should be considering a possibility. The good reason for not considering the possibility that Merope could have passed her powers to Lily is that *there is nothing in canon telling me to consider it.* That's not closed mindedness, it's understanding that the story consists of the words on the page and that's it. If this idea is introduced later I'll certainly consider it, but there is no "real Wizarding World" to appeal to here. Could an extreme theory turn out to be true? Sure. Somebody might have guessed Scabbers was a wizard pre-PoA. Though that, of course, would have drawn on magical things that had already been introduced, and the question of *who* Scabbers was-the fun part of the theory-could not have been predicted until Peter himself was known to exist. It's sticking close to canon. The trouble with this and other backwards theories is that there is no literary reason in canon to begin considering the idea--even if it turned out to be true a good case wasn't made for it. It doesn't bring anything to canon that I can see. Fiction in this way is less like science and more like a murder trial--in fact, this exact kind of dishonest reasoning is unfortunately premise in a lot of true crime novels that claim to "solve" cases and don't. Like in Patricia Cornwell's book about Jack the Ripper. She starts out with a premise pulled out of the air (or pulled out of Stephen Knight's book) takes evidence, makes it fit her story and explains away evidence that doesn't. Or the book about Lindbergh's sister-in-law killing his son and his pretending the boy was kidnapped. It's good to develop an eye for when evidence is being twisted to fit a theory. That's my model for dealing with fiction, not science--it's got more in common with that, because it's about finding evidence for a particular narrative. It's confusing telling a compellng story with proof. I don't think it's bad to have fun with theories. Maybe you will find something interesting and useful in looking for "proof" of your theory so have at it. But you might also--and I see this a lot more often--completely distort canon and make it incoherent, or just plain make things up. It's further, imo, unfair to say that because I see no reason in canon to think that this has happened I "don't want" to see it. What I want or don't want to see--if other people could actually guess it- -has no bearing on whether something is true or not. I doesn't seem like a scientific idea--more like the kind of thing people accuse scientists of when their theories don't hold up. I don't refuse to consider Merope giving her powers to Lily. I did consider it, and found it lacking in any evidence and too unlikely to be worth predicting. Ken: It has never > been explained why splitting your soul makes you look snakelike. It > has never been explained how Voldemort transferred some of his power > to Harry. It has never been explained how Muggle couples occasionally > have magical children. And yet all of those are found in canon. This > fantastical theory combines some elements of all those and so it does > have some grounding in canon. Magpie: And if the turning of Muggle to Wizard via the "gifting" of one's status to another were included in canon we'd have some reason to consider at least something like this. JKR always introduces a magical concept before it becomes important. My problem isn't that I can't explain this transfer through magical theory, since magical theory isn't a real field of study, it's that it's not ever in canon. In fact, it rather destroys one of the main points of canon, the Muggle/Wizard separation. That's a major thing to introduce into your magical system. Ken:> > The real test of any theory is whether it allows the system under > study to be explained and whether it allows predictions to be made > that can be confirmed by observations. At this point in time all we > can do is to run thought experiments. The experimental results will > only be available with the release of DH and most of our wacky > theories will be disproven. Maybe every single one of them. It goes > with the territory. Personally I'd rather read fantastical theories > about the plot that to discuss Molly's failures as a > woman/wife/mother. But surely a list this size is big enough for all us. Magpie: I still believe it's a bad idea to try to apply the rules of scientific theory to a system that by definition is not scientific-- a fictional story. We're not running experiments that will be observed in DH, we're predicting where a story is going based on what's going on in it now. Sure the theory being given here will either turn out to have happened or not in DH. The same could be said for a theory that Harry and Hermione are really the same person, that Snape is really a woman, that Harry and Ron are really twins separated at birth and born in Wisconsin. But there's a reason people see some theories as actually coming from canon and leading to interesting discussion of canon and others being ideas for fanfic. The extreme end of there being no difference is that canon might as well not exist at all. It doesn't matter what's in the book because we can write it ourselves. I do think there's a grey area there, but it's not just all the same. Ken: > If you don't enjoy this kind of speculation that is fine, I'm just > trying to help you see that some of us do enjoy it and that it isn't a > silly way to try to unravel the plot. Magpie: I totally understand that some people like doing this, and I think it's a fine thing to do and have fun with. But often it actually does unravel the plot in a bad way, and when it does that, imo, I'm going to say so. I think the reason it often does this is for exactly the reason the original poster was annoyed with it--that canon becomes secondary to making up this alternate story. That's when it stops being about predicting things. It's not frustrating to me that people enjoy these theories or have ones they'd like to see happen--I don't think Pippin is stupid for her ESE!Lupin theory any more than people are stupid for thinking Snape is DDM. It does frustrate me when people think that stuff they made up is canon, or that being able to make a theory fit canon is the same as proving it to be true. I'm not at all unhappy at people doing this kind of speculating; I think the only time it causes any problems is when it claims to be something else. -m From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Tue Feb 13 14:49:10 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:49:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thank You (Re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: References: <003901c74eea$70158200$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: <003201c74f7e$21fe0e40$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 164912 --Maria wrote- >>>I know DD's portrait will be there and with Steve explanations on his "Thoughts on Portraits," it did make sense since we know that DD was talking or having intellectual discussion with the headmasters portraits in his office when nobody's around. >There's proof on this in one of the books when Harry went to DD's office, he heard whisperings or voices inside but when he went in DD was alone in his office and the portraits were all pretending to be sleeping. >But I have to remember that Harry may not be going back to >Hogwarts in book 7 and with this thought we have to remember as well >that the pensieve is also in Hogwarts. How would the portrait of DD >be of help to him if he isn't going back to Hogwarts? Where is he >going to find another portrait? Also, how is he going to use the >pensieve if he isn't going to Hogwarts, unless of course somebody >will give or bring it to him? <<< --Ronin's Comments- I do remember scenes where Harry hears whispered voices from outside the Headmaster's door. But that isn't really evidence that they were having intellectual discussion. We know that many of the portraits of previous heads are also housed in other locations, including 12 Grimmauld Place, St. Mungos and the MoM. These voices Harry heard could have been nothing more than the portraits giving Dumbledore their reports from their other locations. I'm pretty sure that the main scene where Harry hears the voices from outside the door is when Arthur is injured at the MoM. It would make sense that Dumbledore would be gathering information in this sort of Crisis Room, situation. I don't really have any doubt that Harry will be returning to Hogwarts for at least part of his 7th year. Hogwarts has been a staple in every book of the series so far, just as the Dursley's has been every summer, in spite of Harry not wanting to return there. It wouldn't make sense to me for JKR to change everything in the last book. It's just another thing that would need to be explained and I feel that there is already enough for her to tie up without bringing in problems, such as a new main setting. That's just my opinion of course, I may be wrong. If I am, I don't see much problem in Harry having access to the pensieve. I would suspect that Dumbledore's belongings would be removed for the next head's occupancy. He would also have had a will and if his comments about Sirius's will were any indication, I'd suspect that these most important items would be left to Harry at 12 Grimmauld Place. If Dumbledore was in fact preparing for this inevitable death and creating pensieve lessons for Harry, I'm sure he'd have taken precautions to see that he'd be able to access them. The portrait may be more difficult. But, a wizard as prestigious as Dumbledore would have many portraits throughout the WW. He was famous. We know there would be one in the head's office at Hogwarts, but also at the MoM. He was a member of the Wizengamot and held other titles. His portrait may be publicly available in many places that Harry could access without ever having to go back to Hogwarts. We all have many theories and hopes for the upcoming book. I can't wait to see if any of us were close. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From krulwich at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 15:14:00 2007 From: krulwich at yahoo.com (krulwich) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 15:14:00 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Portraits In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164913 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > People are discussing portraits in various threads. I > don't have a specific reply to any of those threads, but > I think there is an aspect of Portraits that people are > overlooking and it is that aspect that I want to point > out because I think it is important. ... > JKR has said in an interview that the Headmaster Portraits > are unique. The Headmasters leave an imprint of themselves > on Hogwarts. ... > So, after this long winded rant, all I am really saying is > the we need to remember that Headmaster Portraits are MORE > than normal magical portriats. They have greater dept, but > none the less, there is a very real limit to their depth. What about the fat lady portrait? She did more than repeat phrases from her life, she even was relied upon for memory of something that happened to her picture. The concept of "leaving an imprint" is from the conversation about ghosts, and specifically refers to people who chose not to "go on," which presumably wouldn't apply to Hogwarts headmasters. On the other hand, the reverse spell effect did seem to show an imprint of the actual souls of the people involved, since they seemed to act on their own accord, and Lily referred to James "wanting to see" Harry. So the concept does exist. --Dov http://www.harrypottertorah.com/ From muellem at bc.edu Tue Feb 13 18:08:41 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 18:08:41 -0000 Subject: Thank You (Re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: <003201c74f7e$21fe0e40$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164914 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ronin_47" wrote: > I do remember scenes where Harry hears whispered voices from outside the > Headmaster's door. But that isn't really evidence that they were having > intellectual discussion. We know that many of the portraits of previous > heads are also housed in other locations, including 12 Grimmauld Place, St. > Mungos and the MoM. These voices Harry heard could have been nothing more > than the portraits giving Dumbledore their reports from their other > locations. colebiancardi here: one thing I DO remember from HBP is how alert & interested the portraits were when Harry & DD talked about the Horcruxes - the scene right after they view Slughorn's unaltered memory. whether or not the portraits can have "intellectual discussions" (and I think they can...), they do have a lot of knowledge and they do know about the Horcruxes. And that is important. colebiancardi From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Tue Feb 13 18:12:26 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:12:26 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thank You (Re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: <003201c74f7e$21fe0e40$7bd02444@TheRonin> References: <003901c74eea$70158200$7bd02444@TheRonin> <003201c74f7e$21fe0e40$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: <948bbb470702131012m14864bdcy9368884cfe196171@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164915 But I have to remember that Harry may not be going back to Hogwarts in book 7 and with this thought we have to remember as well that the pensieve is also in Hogwarts. How would the portrait of DD be of help to him if he isn't going back to Hogwarts? Where is he going to find another portrait? Also, how is he going to use the pensieve if he isn't going to Hogwarts, unless of course somebody will give or bring it to him? I am thinking and hoping that there would be more than just the portrait and the pensieve for DD to appear in book 7 to be able to help or give advice to Harry, one that would not include going back to Hogwarts just to talk to the portrait or use the pensieve, though I don't know what it is. There, I finally said it out loud, this has been in my mind far to long now. Thank you again everyone. Cheers. Maria ====================================== Carol responds: I would bet money that Harry is going back to Hogwarts even if he doesn't attend as a student. Why have McGonagall discuss the question of whether Hogwarts will stay open in front of Harry if Hogwarts has no more role in the books? ====================================== --Ronin's Comments- I do remember scenes where Harry hears whispered voices from outside the Headmaster's door. But that isn't really evidence that they were having intellectual discussion. We know that many of the portraits of previous heads are also housed in other locations, including 12 Grimmauld Place, St. Mungos and the MoM. These voices Harry heard could have been nothing more than the portraits giving Dumbledore their reports from their other locations. I'm pretty sure that the main scene where Harry hears the voices from outside the door is when Arthur is injured at the MoM. It would make sense that Dumbledore would be gathering information in this sort of Crisis Room, situation. I don't really have any doubt that Harry will be returning to Hogwarts for at least part of his 7th year. Hogwarts has been a staple in every book of the series so far, just as the Dursley's has been every summer, in spite of Harry not wanting to return there. It wouldn't make sense to me for JKR to change everything in the last book. It's just another thing that would need to be explained and I feel that there is already enough for her to tie up without bringing in problems, such as a new main setting. ================================================= Jeremiah: Maria, I think Carol has a point in having Hogwarts stay open. I, however, think Harry will not attend. (But that's just my take on it.) I do, however, think that Hermione will attend... not sure about Ron. (Well, Hermoine needs her library!) But we are overlooking something, I think. Just because we have seen the Portrait of DD and his Pensive in his office at Hogwarts does not mean that they will stay there. Aberforth is in Hogsmead (he's the bartender @ the Hog's Head from what I understand...) and he just moght be the person who gets DD's posessions. So, the Pensive might be in Hogsmede which, if Hermione stays at Hogwarts, would be great at facilitating meetings between the 3 characters (Ron, Harry and Hermioine). Also, who's to say that Harry doesn't get a pensive for himself? Not that he has anywhere to keep it, but it is a possibility. I'm sure DD's portrait is in other locations just like the other Heads of Hogwarts. Maybe Aberforth has one. Maybe Madame Rosmerta? One in the MoM? We do not know where the other portraits are but I'm sure JKR has placed the very strategically. ;) but i do have one question... we see Snape and DD takeing memories out and putting them back into their heads. What would happen if you placed someone else's memory into your own head? Hmm... Anyhoo.. That may be a way to dispense with the Pensive. Jeremiah. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 18:19:34 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 18:19:34 -0000 Subject: Thank You -- Return to Hogwarts (was: re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164916 --- "Maria Vaerewyck" wrote: > > ... > > ... > > But I have to remember that Harry may not be going > back to Hogwarts in book 7 and with this thought we > have to remember as well that the pensieve is also in > Hogwarts. How would the portrait of DD be of help to > him if he isn't going back to Hogwarts? Where is he > going to find another portrait? Also, how is he going > to use the pensieve if he isn't going to Hogwarts, > unless of course somebody will give or bring it to him? > > ... > > Thank you again everyone. Cheers. > > Maria > bboyminn: Carol has already address whether Harry will go back to school or not but I will expand on what she said. You are making that same mistake that many people have made, thinking in absolutes. The question isn't, and has never been, whether Harry will go back to Hogwarts, but whether Harry will go back to Hogwarts as a student. Likely he won't go back as a student; he won't be enrolled. But that is no reason to think that Harry will never set foot in Hogwarts again.Even if Harry is not a student, it is unrealistic to think that he won't be back to Hogwarts several times in the course of the school year. Carol listed many reasons why Harry would return to the school. Other reasons might be to continue with the DA Club, both as a means of training other students and as a way of training himself. Note: I'm determined to revised the DA Club even if no one else is. Harry may come to the school for special training that is unrelated to normal school classes. Harry may come specifically to talk to Dumbledore's portrait or to Slughorn or to McGonagall or to speak specifically with his friend Hagrid. There is always a chance he will revisit the Chamber of Secrets. He many need to venture into the dark forest to talk with the Centaurs. He may try to bring the Acromantula Spider over to his side. He may visit Grawp again. He may have to break in to Hogwarts and recapture if from Voldemort. Harry, absolutely beyond any shadow of a doubt, will return to Hogwarts Castle. The fact that Harry might not come to Hogwarts as a student doesn't in anyway imply that he will not be back at Hogwarts as a visitor. A minor point, but one worth clearing up. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 18:56:57 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 18:56:57 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme - Making it Work In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164917 --- "Ken Hutchinson" wrote: > > --- "Magpie" wrote: > > > > > > Magpie: > > I've got to go with va32h on this one. However > > helpful this sort of thing is ..., what she's > > describing ... is that people start with a fantasic > > premise and then make canon fit it, explaining > > things away or re-interpreting stuff in a way > > that's ... is barely meaningful even in this > > context. ... > > > > Ken: > > But that is not how it works and to condemn a > technique because it has occasionally, or frequently, > been misused is wrong. It is perfectly fine to start > with a fantastic premise and work backwards. When you > get to the point where you realize that Merope and > Lily were not alive at the same time you give up or > try to patch up the theory. ...edited... bboyminn: Indeed at some point we all have to accept that our favorite theories are simply wrong. For example, I was absolutely convinced that HBP would be a fight between Draco and Harry over the Black Estate. However, we don't give them up without a serious effort to make then work. Yes, the original theory that started this thread was hopelessly flawed. But there exists an old theory that is still valid, that could make the original theory work. Though the 'power' could not be consciously willed. This theory arose out of our discussions of how magical genetics works. How is magical power transferred from one generation to another, and how is it that Muggle- borns can spring up out of nowhere. This particular theory says that there is a finite amount of magical essense in the world, and it is passed on in a manner similar to reincarnation. When a wizard grandfather dies, his magical essense lingers searching for a new heir to carry this essense on in new generations. But what if there is no new generation as in Sirius's case. Or what if there is an excess of magical essense yearning to be realized, searching for someone to give it life again. Normally magical essense, or call if magical spirit if you perfer, seeks out members of the wizarding world; the sons and daughters of witches and wizards. But, as I said, if there are few wizards being born and there is an excess of magical spirit yearning to be reborn, then the magical spririt seeks out simpatico, seeks out a kindred spirit amoung the muggle borns. They giving birth to a new magical line that is capable of using up the available magical essense. When a Squib is born to magical parents, it simply means that the finite supply of magical essense has been exhausted. Magical children are being born but there is no magical essense to imbue them with magial abilities. So, to make the original theory work, perhaps the essense of Merope's magical spirit was wandering looking for a kindred spirit, or perhaps that essense was looking for redemption, a chance to undo the misery her family caused and the misery she felt. So, Merope magical spirit was reincarnated in Lily having found in her the essense that Merope felt would redeem her magically and spiritually. So, unlikely as it is, here is a way for Merope's magic to have been transferred to Lily. It is a long stretch, filled with speculation, but there is really nothing so far that allows us to flat out say it is wrong. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 19:05:57 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:05:57 -0000 Subject: Thank You (Re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702131012m14864bdcy9368884cfe196171@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164918 Jeremiah wrote: > > Maria, I think Carol has a point in having Hogwarts stay open. I, however, think Harry will not attend. (But that's just my take on it.) I do, however, think that Hermione will attend... not sure about Ron. (Well, Hermoine needs her library!) Carol: Or at least that's another important Hogwarts resource that I forgot to list in my post! > Jeremiah: > But we are overlooking something, I think. Just because we have seen the Portrait of DD and his Pensive in his office at Hogwarts does not mean that they will stay there. Also, who's to say that Harry doesn't get a pensive for himself? Not that he has anywhere to keep it, but it is a possibility. Carol responds: I don't think Pensieves are very common, and they're probably very expensive. It would make sense in terms of story economy for DD to will Harry his Pensieve, along with any appropriate bottled memories, and for him to keep it at 12 GP rather than Hogwarts if he's staying there. Of course, the Pensieve is of no use to Harry without other people's memories since he doesn't know how to remove his own (or "sift" them to find relationships, either). It would only be a form of noninteractive time travel for Harry, as far as I can see, a way of learning about Snape's true motivations via Dumbledore. (If he wants to learn about Godric's Hollow, he'll have to use his own memory, which he doesn't yet know how to remove. Maybe Legilimens!Lupin could do it?) jeremiah: > but i do have one question... we see Snape and DD takeing memories out and putting them back into their heads. What would happen if you placed someone else's memory into your own head? Hmm... Anyhoo.. That may be a way to dispense with the Pensive. Carol: We've seen that already, remember? Tom Riddle killed the Riddles and Hepzibah Smith and then placed the memories of those murders in the heads of the people he framed, Morfin Gaunt and Hokey the house-elf. Safely to use the Pensieve and not mistake someone else's memories for your own! Besides, Harry needs to learn how to remove a memory from his own head, much less someone else's head (imagine what might happen if he botched the job and got the wrong memory!) before he can explore it--unless it's already safely bottled--and the only safe way to objectively explore a memory is a Pensieve. If you could see your own memories clearly, fully, and objectively without removing them and placing them in a Pensieve (a pun on pensive + thoughtful and sieve = sift), there would be no need for a Pensieve. Carol, noting that Hermione's Ancient Runes studies are another Chekhov's gun that hasn't been fired and hoping she'll decipher or translate the runes around the edge of DD's Pensieve From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 19:43:11 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:43:11 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Portraits In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164919 > --- "krulwich" wrote: > > --- "Steve" wrote: > > > ... > > JKR has said in an interview that the Headmaster > > Portraits are unique. The Headmasters leave an > > imprint of themselves on Hogwarts. > ... > > So, after this long winded rant, all I am really > > saying is the we need to remember that Headmaster > > Portraits are MORE than normal magical portriats. > > They have greater dept, but none the less, there is > > a very real limit to their depth. > > Dov: > > What about the fat lady portrait? She did more than > repeat phrases from her life, she even was relied upon > for memory of something that happened to her picture. > bboyminn: Well, first and foremost, the Fat Lady isn't NUTS. She is not as nutty as Mrs. Black or Sir Cadagon, so, not being nuts, she is able to act more rationally. But she is far from realized. She is far from being able to engage in clear rational thinking and analysis. Yes, she is able to monitor the Passwords to Gryffindor. She is able to affect certain moods; anger, annoyed, pleasant, etc.... But what about letting Sirius Black into the Gryffindor Tower simply because he knew the password? It seems the whole castle knew about Black and what his assumed intentions were. What rational person would let a murderer in simply because he knew the correct password? That more than anything shows the limits of the Fat Lady. I can't see Phineas Nigellus or Fortescue acting in such a simplistic fashion as to let a murder have access to his target simply because he knew the password. > Dov: > > The concept of "leaving an imprint" is from the > conversation about ghosts, ... > bboyminn: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cfm?id=80 Q: All the paintings we have seen at Hogwarts are of dead people. They seem to be living through their portraits. How is this so? If there was a painting of Harry's parents, would he be able to obtain advice from them? JKR-A: "...they are not as fully realised as ghosts, as you have probably noticed. The place where you see them really talk is in Dumbledore's office, primarily; the idea is that the previous headmasters and headmistresses leave behind a faint imprint of themselves. They leave their aura, almost, in the office and they can give some counsel to the present occupant...." So, ghost are mention, but the question and answer are clearly not about ghosts. > Dov: > > On the other hand, the reverse spell effect did seem > to show an imprint of the actual souls of the people > involved, since they seemed to act on their own accord, > and Lily referred to James "wanting to see" Harry. So > the concept does exist. > > --Dov bboyminn: Ah finally a chance to address this issue. Note that what Mr. Diggory does to pull a spell from Harry's wand in the forest at the Quidditch World Cup, is not exactly the same thing that happened when the Wands connected in the graveyard. Yes, they are based in the same magic, but they are far different. To use the Prior Incantato Charm to pull spells from a wand, only brings a faint imprint, sort of a signature of the spell. Some signature are very obvious, for example, a small Dark Mark appears from the spell that cast a large real Dark Mark. But what about more abstract spells. What does a Stunning Curse look like? What does a Jelly-Legs Curse look like? What does a vanishing spell look like? I don't think we can know. I think someone who is an expert at interpreting these signatures can probably tell from very subtle and abstract clues, but it definitely takes an expert. Some people ask, why didn't we see this spell or that spell in the graveyard, and I say, we did, it's just that Harry didn't have the skill to interpret them. Now, what happened when the wands connected is far more powerful. I agree the expressions of the AK curse, showed the Person who was killed and that person was very fully realized. They had foreknowledge, they could analyse the events they faced, they could plot and plan and execute. But we can't guarantee that this is what we would see when we performed the Prior Incantato Spell. Certainly if we could get Snape's wand and performed the spell, we would get an image of Dumbledore after we cleared out all the other spells that had been performed between then and now. But would it be Dumbledore, or would it simply be a faint whispy image of him? The Brother Wand affect was much more powerful and therefore much more realized than the Prior Incantato Spell. So, I don't think we can bring Dumbledore back to life, even for a few moment, using that spell. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From cdayr at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 20:26:19 2007 From: cdayr at yahoo.com (cdayr) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:26:19 -0000 Subject: Hagrid, Eggs, and TT!Voldemort Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164920 Going over some thoughts I have on what might play in the end from CoS, I realized I could re-post my very favorite wacky pet theory, that I originally posted way-back-when in the summer of 2004! Check it out! It still torments me! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/106761 To get right to it: I think that the "traveler" who gave Hagrid the acromantula egg (Aragog) back in TR's Hogwart's years is going to be significant in the end, and was, in fact, TimeTurned!Voldemort. American pb ed., pg. 277, Aragog says, "I was not born in the castle. I come from a distant land. A traveler gave me to Hagrid when I was an egg." I can give you a number of reasons why I think this will be important- read the cited post above for my original theory, but in short: it is a very strange word to select- "traveler"- which indicates that this fact about the person was significant to both Hagrid and Aragog (it is Aragog who calls him/her a traveler- he must have learned that from Hagrid). The word is in the book and the movie (weird). We know VM is thought to have been a world "traveler" during his missing years. And Quirrell!Mort tries the same technique to get Hagrid in trouble again in SS/PS, using a dragon egg to get info from him instead (so had he done it before?). I still cannot figure out why anyone would be handing out Acromantula eggs to a 13-year old (or where Hagrid could have met this "traveler"- Hogsmeade I suppose) unless it was specifically to set up Hagrid as a scapegoat for the opening of the Chamber. The only person I can see wanting to do this is Tom Riddle- after all, he is the only one who knew a scapegoat was needed. Therefore, I propose that during the missing years of Tom's transformation into VM, he time-turned into the past and WAS the "traveler" who came to Hogwart's and gave Hagrid the egg, to help his young self. If this is true, then a second, TT!Voldemort was lurking around for years during Tom's transformation. For me, this opens up many scenarios in which VM may have given himself access to some of his future horcruxes because he was "re-living" a portion of his life, and could accomplish what he had failed to do in his first go-round. (Perhaps it is the older TT!VM who actually kills Hepzibah, for instance.) It also gives him a huge amount of extra time to "become" VM, because (as someone charmingly stated in a long ago post) the only way back from time turning is The Long Way. His appearance by the time he is back to his original time line would be the extreme change we know has occurred, because he would be much older than he should be, and would have made more of his horcruxes. So I see this minor point (the "traveler") as actually being essential to knowing where, when, and how VM made his horcruxes, and where they are now. I like the idea as well that an older and more corrupted VM existed alongside the younger version of himself for a number of years, possibly able to advise and guide his younger self towards darker and darker magic (from behind a big hood or something ). I'd love your insights on this theory, which has been percolating for so many years for me, but is still forming. Celia Who, against all better judgment, still loves thinking about time turning, even when it twists her mind into a knot. From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Tue Feb 13 20:27:15 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:27:15 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thank You (Re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: References: <948bbb470702131012m14864bdcy9368884cfe196171@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <948bbb470702131227n6e0d5723v9fdebc654eac9107@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164921 jeremiah: > but i do have one question... we see Snape and DD takeing memories out and putting them back into their heads. What would happen if you placed someone else's memory into your own head? Hmm... Anyhoo.. That may be a way to dispense with the Pensive. Carol: We've seen that already, remember? Tom Riddle killed the Riddles and Hepzibah Smith and then placed the memories of those murders in the heads of the people he framed, Morfin Gaunt and Hokey the house-elf. Safely to use the Pensieve and not mistake someone else's memories for your own! Besides, Harry needs to learn how to remove a memory from his own head, much less someone else's head (imagine what might happen if he botched the job and got the wrong memory!) before he can explore it--unless it's already safely bottled--and the only safe way to objectively explore a memory is a Pensieve. If you could see your own memories clearly, fully, and objectively without removing them and placing them in a Pensieve (a pun on pensive + thoughtful and sieve = sift), there would be no need for a Pensieve. Carol, noting that Hermione's Ancient Runes studies are another Chekhov's gun that hasn't been fired and hoping she'll decipher or translate the runes around the edge of DD's Pensieve ======================================= Jeremiah: I don't remember if Tom Riddle places memories into other people's heads so i'll have to re-read that section... I'm sure you're right, though. I never even though for a second about Herione reading the runes on the edge of the pensive. Way to go on the observaiton. I'm sure it will have clues how to use the thing... Like a "User Manual" for wizards. Probably a warning or two. I can see it now: Harry goes in and doesn't know how to get out, Hermione is there and does something to get them all out and when Harry asks how she did it she'll put on the "Are you just plain stupid" attitude she gets and say seomthing like, "I read the instructions on the edge of the bowl. (sighs) You do remember that I have Anciet Runes as a class, don't you?" and then Ron will say something like, "I hate it when she does that." Hogwarts is full of resources from people (living and dead) to objects to memories. it would be impossible to list everything that could be used as a resource to Harry and the rest of the gang. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Tue Feb 13 19:30:26 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 14:30:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thank You (Re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: References: <003201c74f7e$21fe0e40$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: <001b01c74fa5$731f0780$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 164922 --colebiancardi wrote-- >>>one thing I DO remember from HBP is how alert & interested the >portraits were when Harry & DD talked about the Horcruxes - the scene >right after they view Slughorn's unaltered memory. >whether or not the portraits can have "intellectual discussions" (and >I think they can...), they do have a lot of knowledge and they do know >about the Horcruxes. And that is important.<<< --Ronin's Comments- Granted, the portraits certainly aren't afraid to express their opinions about certain things and they sure are nosey. Lol Phineus Nigellus is particularly outspoken and even seems to show grief when he finds out that his great, great grandson has been killed. I think that they are extremely limited however and that is why Dumbledore would not take their advice on important matters. (Though he may have considered their input) Since they are confined to only what events take place near their portrait locations, they will have knowledge of some events. But it cannot be reliable and accurate in many cases because their view is so limited and they may take events out of context. They are only impressions of their living selves and cannot venture beyond the confines of their various frames. (Aside from when they are traveling to their other portraits, although they only seem to take in information from their own portraits) Basically, what I'm saying is that portraits seem unreliable. Even if they are able to show concern and speak intelligently, we've been told that they are mere impressions of their former selves. There are too many variables. We don't know what pieces of their former selves or former memories are lost. We can not rely too firmly on their eyewitness accounts because their view is limited to the rooms where their portraits are housed. They may only seem eager to listen in and sometimes join in to the conversations around them because they are so limited and bored. (Just my opinion) No doubt portraits have their uses. But I don't think that Dumbledore's portrait will be anywhere near as useful as he was in life. The portrait may guide Harry to certain things, such as memory vials, etc. But I don't think they will have any knowledge that Harry hasn't already discovered about horcruxes. I mean, if they had known and had told Dumbledore about them, Harry wouldn't have been charged with getting the memory from Professor Slughorne. I am currently reading HBP again and have not reached the scene you are referring to. I don't argue that portraits are important and useful though, only that they are somewhat skewed and can not be the key to Harry's success. I haven't been able to read as much as I'd like because I'm also in the middle of my session finals and have to study, but I will certainly pay close attention when I read the scene you've mentioned. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 21:43:15 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:43:15 -0000 Subject: Weasley Family Dynamics (was:Re: The Molly Question (long!)...) In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0702082011q56311b3ejc9ce32c09d1a6a3c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164923 > >>Debbie: > Molly is hardly the exemplar of perfect motherhood, but as a > slightly imperfect mom myself, I'll have to take issue with the > wholesale condemnation. > Betsy Hp: I'd unleashed the hounds. But pulling back a bit, I agree that Molly is more than likely supposed to be more a character of comedy than anything else. A "Mrs. Bennet" (of "Pride and Prejudice") type I think. > >>Betsy Hp: > >But Molly has no say in Arthur's career decisions. Her strong > >dislike of his current position contrasts strongly with Arthur's > >love for it. If it was ever discussed nothing was resolved, IMO. > >>Debbie: > I don't read this the same way at all. Molly *does* dislike > Arthur's current (former) position, but I think she appreciates > that his principles, i.e., his fondness for Muggles, have held him > back. Betsy Hp: I suppose my sense that this is a very real issue comes from Arthur's enjoyment of his job, and Molly's hatred of it. Plus, Arthur not being thrilled by his transfer and Molly's joy over it. I think Arthur didn't like that his cause wasn't taken seriously while Molly didn't like that Arthur was taken for his cause. > >>Debbie: > I know some people see Molly as not sharing his principles, but I > don't agree. I think Ron's very forcefully expressed views on the > subject at age 12 reflect what he learned at home. And Molly > probably did most of that teaching. Besides, Molly lost two > brothers in VWI to the followers of an anti-Muggle maniac. Surely > she sees how divisive that sort of thinking is. Betsy Hp: Eh, The Black family didn't care too much for Voldemort either. I doubt they were ready to start rethinking the WW's position on Muggle- Wizard relations. And we know that Ron got his Muggle friendly comic books from his dad. Molly has always been a bit squirrely about Muggle stuff, IMO. Her fit over Arthur's stitches, her quick turnaround on Hermione, her opening commentary about the Muggles in the subway... I just sense something there. I wouldn't go so far as to say that Molly is full out anti-muggle, but she does seem a bit suspicious of outsiders, and muggles are that by definition. And so I especially see her having issue with Arthur taking up Muggle-rights to the detriment of his career and the family finances. > >>Debbie: > > I don't see the Weasley kids as linked to one parent or another. Betsy Hp: Well, since I do see a schism within the Weasley household, and have for some time, I do tend to seperate out the children by linking them to one parent or the other. I'll admit that physical appearance is a big part of my system (though JKR uses physical appearance as short- hand for other things, so I think I'm okay here). Ron, Percy and Bill all physically resemble their father. While Charlie and the twins are more physically like their mother. Tall and lean versus short and stocky. (Ginny has put herself firmly into her mother's camp in HBP, so I'll assume she tends more towards curvy than lean.) But more than that, I think Ron and Percy and Bill are a bit less physical in actual than their siblings. And a bit more intellectual, or at least a bit more interested in cerebral persuits. (Chess, etc.) > >>Debbie: > I could make a good case that Percy and Ron are like Molly in their > sensitivities. For example, of all the Weasleys, the two most > outwardly sensitive about the family's poverty are Molly and Ron. > Betsy Hp: Heh, see I lean towards Percy and Ron (which would also tie in Arthur and Bill) being more emotionally sensitive than Molly and the twins and Ginny (and I guess that would mean Charlie). Ron is bothered by the families poverty. So he tries his damndest to *not* draw attention to it. He'd prefer it never be mentioned. (IIRC, Harry recognized that Ron's "I *hate* being poor" was something he'd do best to not mention or comment on.) Whereas Molly seems to wear her poverty like a badge, dragging her son's friend into the family vault so he can get a good look at just how little they have, reminding all of her children that they are poor and so can't have nice things. To be objective (or at least to try ) perhaps Molly is doing her best to not have the poverty be a big thing, not be an elephant in the room. But her way of handling it as just one other obstacle to work around is *very* different from how Ron would handle it. (And to be perfectly honest, I couldn't say which method is better.) > >>Debbie > who could write a dissertation on the Weasley family dynamics, but > is trying to spare the list Betsy Hp: I find the Weasley family dynamics rather fascinating myself. And I was getting bored of all the speculative theories, so thought I'd bore the list in my own way. Betsy Hp From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 13 22:07:58 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:07:58 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme - Making it Work In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164924 Steve: > So, to make the original theory work, perhaps the > essense of Merope's magical spirit was wandering > looking for a kindred spirit, or perhaps that > essense was looking for redemption, a chance to undo > the misery her family caused and the misery she felt. > So, Merope magical spirit was reincarnated in Lily > having found in her the essense that Merope felt > would redeem her magically and spiritually. > > So, unlikely as it is, here is a way for Merope's > magic to have been transferred to Lily. It is a > long stretch, filled with speculation, but there is > really nothing so far that allows us to flat out > say it is wrong. Magpie: Yes, but that's exactly what I said about how it becomes about other people having to prove that this *didn't* happen rather than any real proof from canon that the author has or is writing it. We can't say anything's wrong if by "wrong" we mean proving it didn't happen, since we can just speculate around any problems. The issues isn't that this is a horrible thing to do or anything, but the question of what we mean to say that we're making the theory "work." I mean, this to me is making a fanfic work. It doesn't tell me anything about canon or seem to really be connected to canon. You've taken an idea made up by a reader, and saying you can make it work by using an idea made up by another reader, neither of which wrote anything in the books. This particularly theory of magic as an entity looking for people to inhabit is an interesting fantasy idea, but there's no basis for it in HP. So the theory's no closer to "working" in canon than it was if by "working" we mean giving us reason to think this is what's happening, what the author is writing, or something that will explain things in canon. It just explains itself and draws a connection between Rowling's story and this one. -m From muellem at bc.edu Tue Feb 13 22:03:09 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:03:09 -0000 Subject: Thank You (Re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: <001b01c74fa5$731f0780$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164925 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ronin_47" wrote: > > No doubt portraits have their uses. But I don't think that Dumbledore's > portrait will be anywhere near as useful as he was in life. The portrait may > guide Harry to certain things, such as memory vials, etc. But I don't think > they will have any knowledge that Harry hasn't already discovered about > horcruxes. I mean, if they had known and had told Dumbledore about them, > Harry wouldn't have been charged with getting the memory from Professor > Slughorne. > colebiancardi here: what I meant about that scene being important is that now the new HeadMaster(or I guess it would be HeadMistress) would have access to that information about Horcruxes. Whatever DD told Harry in that room, the portraits know about. That is why I think DD and Snape argued out in the forest. I don't think they wanted the portraits to hear their conversation. colebiancardi (who stubbornly insists that if a portrait can feel grief, then they aren't so limited afterall) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 22:17:01 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:17:01 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Portraits In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164926 bboyminn wrote: > > Well, first and foremost, the Fat Lady isn't NUTS. She is not as nutty as Mrs. Black or Sir Cadagon, so, not being nuts, she is able to act more rationally. But she is far from realized. She is far from being able to engage in clear rational thinking and analysis. > > Yes, she is able to monitor the Passwords to Gryffindor. She is able to affect certain moods; anger, annoyed, pleasant, etc.... But what about letting Sirius Black into the Gryffindor Tower simply because he knew the password? It seems the whole castle knew about Black and what his assumed intentions were. What rational person would let a murderer in simply because he knew the correct password? That more than anything shows the limits of the Fat Lady. Carol responds: But don't you have it backwards? The Fat Lady refused to admit Sirius Black because he *didn't* have the password, which is why he furiously slashed up her painting. Sir Cadogan let Black into Gryffindor Tower because he had the whole list (Crookshanks had stolen the list of passwords that Neville had written down because of Sir Cadogan's habit of frequently changing the password and given it to Black). That's the reason that Sir Cadogan was "fired" and the Fat Lady reinstated (on condition that she be protected by Security Trolls, who aren't mentioned again). So whether or not the Fat Lady is capable of rational thinking, she's not the one who let Sirius Black into Gryffindor Tower. I certainly agree that Sir Cadogan isn't a "rational person," but we can't judge the Fat Lady's capacities by his. Dov wrote: > > The concept of "leaving an imprint" is from the conversation about ghosts, ... bboyminn responded: > > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cfm?id=80 > > Q: All the paintings we have seen at Hogwarts are of dead people. They seem to be living through their portraits. How is this so? If there was a painting of Harry's parents, would he be able to obtain advice from them? > > JKR-A: "...they are not as fully realised as ghosts, as you have probably noticed. The place where you see them really talk is in Dumbledore's office, primarily; the idea is that the previous headmasters and headmistresses leave behind a faint imprint of themselves. They leave their aura, almost, in the office and they can give some counsel to the present occupant...." > > > So, ghost are mention, but the question and answer are clearly not about ghosts. > >Carol: Thanks for providing that quote. But Dov is also right. Snape uses the word "imprint" to describe ghosts in HBP: "A ghost, as I trust that you are all aware by now, is the imprint of a departed soul left upon the earth" (HBP Am. ed. 460). So both the portraits in DD's office (and perhaps the other Hogwarts portraits) and the Hogwarts ghosts are "imprints" of a dead witch or wizard or of that person's soul). While the dictionary definition of "imprint" doesn't give us much help with regard to JKR's use of the word (so little help, in fact, that I'm not going to take the trouble to quote it), maybe we can get some idea of her intended meaning by comparing her description of portraits with Snape's definition of ghosts and what we know of both. Both are "imprints," but portraits are "faint[er]," less fully realized than ghosts, but the same sort of thing. Ghosts, Snape reminds us, are transparent, but (as he does not say) they are also three-dimensional, able to move through walls and float through the air--to speak, to see and hear, but not to eat. (I'd rather not know whether they can still smell, given NHN's birthday celebration.) Portraits can move only from one portrait to another, either any portrait within Hogwarts (the Fat Lady, her friend Violet, and Sir Cadogan all move into other paintings at some point) or, in the case of the headmasters and headmistresses, to portraits of themselves elsewhere in the WW. They, too, can see and hear (they report events such as someone's arrival or pending arrival to Dumbledore), and if the Fat Lady's binge at Christmas is any evidence, can also smell, taste, eat, drink, and overindulge. Whereas Mrs. Black is nothing but a caricature, Portrait!Phineas seems to be just as fully realized a personality as Nearly Headless Nick. NHN misses the feasts he could once taste and tries to tell Harry what little he knows about death ("He [Sirius Black] will have gone on"); Phineas mourns the great-great-grandson he so snarkily derided when he was alive, rushing to 12 GP to search for him in what, to me, was a very touching moment. Phineas also twice defends Professor Snape, or at least complains about Harry's disrespectful attitude toward him, in HBP, making me wonder exactly what he has overheard between snape and DD in that office. So is a portrait a kind of two-dimensional, fully colored pseudo-ghost with limited mobility but all five senses intact? (If the Fat Lady couldn't feel that knife, why was she so terrified?) Of course, a witch or wizard can have only one ghost (if he or she so chooses) but multiple portraits, even, conceivably, both a ghost and a portrait though we haven't seen any character with both. (I very much doubt that Dumbledore will be the first to do so since he's not afraid of death and has no reason to stay. But the fact that he's peacefully sleeping when Harry sees him seems significant.) Imprint. I'm still not exactly sure what it means. "Echo" might be closer, but she uses that term for the solid-seeming smoky forms that come out of Voldemort's wand as the result of the Priori Incantem effect, forms which, like ghosts, can interact with Harry and which remember their own deaths ("He killed me, that one," says the echo of Frank Bryce) and which, as you point out, can anticipate a future event. Exactly what they are is unclear; they seem like the shades or spirits of the dead, like the spirits Harry is likely to encounter if he goes beyond the Veil in DH--not ghosts, not confined to this world or clinging to it because they're afraid (NHN) or unwilling (Myrtle) to move on. Ghosts and portraits, whatever they are, are not the spirit or the soul of the dead person. Nor are they animated by fragments of soul, or they would be Horcruxes, and only a murderer can create a Horcrux. The portraits in some ways resemble the Sorting Hat, which can also interact, having some of the Four Founders' "brains" in it, but it seems to have a Legilimency spell on it as well which the portraits (and, of course, the ghosts) don't have. Still, maybe the portraits also have a bit of their subjects' "brains" in them. They seem as much like magical objects that can think for themselves as like two-dimensional ghosts. They are clearly wizard-made products, unlike a ghost, which is the result of a choice made by a witch or wizard as he dies, the choice to remain rather than go on to the next great adventure. And yet both ghosts (or at least NHN) and portraits (as JKR says) are capable of "giving counsel" (as is the Sorting Hat in its most recent songs). . . . Carol, who feels that JKR's choice of the word "imprint" for both ghosts and portraits must be significant but still can't put her finger on JKR's intended meaning for that word From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Tue Feb 13 22:22:49 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:22:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thank You (Re: Dumbledore in book 7) In-Reply-To: References: <001b01c74fa5$731f0780$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: <001801c74fbd$80ec94f0$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 164927 --colebiancardi wrote-- >>>what I meant about that scene being important is that now the new >HeadMaster(or I guess it would be HeadMistress) would have access to >that information about Horcruxes. Whatever DD told Harry in that >room, the portraits know about. >That is why I think DD and Snape argued out in the forest. I don't >think they wanted the portraits to hear their conversation. >colebiancardi >(who stubbornly insists that if a portrait can feel grief, then they >aren't so limited afterall)<<< --Ronin's Comments- Ah. I see what you are saying. I wonder if they will volunteer information about horcruxes to her or if she'll have to prod them. But the portraits seem loyal to t he rightful head of Hogwarts. (Rightful. Not someone like Umbridge. lol) So I imagine she wouldn't have to twist their arms too much. That's a good point about why Snape and Dumbledore might have taken their discussion outdoors. Assuming we are talking about them planning the events at the end of HBP, it would be crucial that nobody would interfere or know information that could make this plan fail. Even if the information were given out to the new head after Dumbledore was gone, it could put lives in danger. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 13 22:53:55 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:53:55 -0000 Subject: Weasley Family Dynamics (was:Re: The Molly Question (long!)...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164928 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > >>Debbie: > > Molly is hardly the exemplar of perfect motherhood, but as a > > slightly imperfect mom myself, I'll have to take issue with the > > wholesale condemnation. > > > > Betsy Hp: > I'd unleashed the hounds. But pulling back a bit, I agree that > Molly is more than likely supposed to be more a character of comedy > than anything else. A "Mrs. Bennet" (of "Pride and Prejudice") type > I think. > Carol: Do you really think so? Mrs. Bennett is a grown-up Lydia, formerly a pretty young flirt and still flighty and brainless. her one ambition is to marry off her daughters. Neither she nor Mr. Bennett ever disciplines the girls, who do as they please (within the limits allowed by their society) whether it's play the piano, read a novel, or run off after the soldiers. They're not expected to help at home ("We ar quite able to keep a cook, Mr. Collins!") Molly expects her sons (and presumably Ginny) to help with the de-gnoming or cutting up the potatoes (IIRC). She also tries to maintain discipline, though her idea of doing so is to yell at them, send a Howler, go through their pockets using Accio, or burn their order forms. It's a lot more than Mrs. Bennett does. IIRC, the closest she ever comes to disciplining a daughter is to scold Lizzie for refusing to marry Mr. Collins. Molly may be primarily a comic figure, and she certainly presents as much of a contrast in her way to Arthur (usually as lax a disciplinarian as the more intellectual but still ineffectual Mr. Bennett), but she also genuinely cares about her children and their futures and about Harry. (She's the first person ever to hug and comfort him like a mother.) Her Boggart, the deaths of any and all of her children or her husband (and, yes, I'm sure Ginny is there; we just didn't see her because Harry came in late and Lupin vanished the Boggart before it was done), shows how deep her love for her family (and Harry) is. Mrs. Bennett, superficial and shallow, loves the silly, flirtacious, and ultimately promiscuous Lydia above the more intelligent, steady, and sensible Elizabeth and Jane. > Betsy Hp: > I suppose my sense that this is a very real issue comes from Arthur's enjoyment of his job, and Molly's hatred of it. Plus, Arthur not being thrilled by his transfer and Molly's joy over it. > > I think Arthur didn't like that his cause wasn't taken seriously > while Molly didn't like that Arthur was taken for his cause. Carol: I don't really understand this last sentence, but as I understand it, Molly doesn't like the way Arthur's affection for Muggles (or Muggle artifacts) holds him back at the Ministry. She's also not thrilled that he creates loopholes in his own regulations so that he can get away with enchanting Muggle artifacts at home even though his job is to arrest anyone else who does it (or at least confiscate the artifact). "My wife thinks I'm mad," he tells the Dursleys (who obviously share the opinion, or rather, hold it much more firmly than Molly does, and one of the Twins dismisses him with "Dad collects plugs." The Twins and Molly view Arthur quite realistically, IMO, as a loveable eccentric. But Molly, who resents Slughorn for not recognizing Arthur's talents, knows that he could succeed in the Ministry if he wanted to. There's nothing wrong with ambition as long as you don't step on others to accomplish your own goals. She values Percy because he has it. Arthur, unfortunately for his relationship with Percy, doesn't. I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you see Muggle rights as some sort of cause for Mr. Weasley, who certainly doesn't approve of the Twins' conduct toward Dudley or Willy Widdershin's blocking Muggle toilets, but he's also rather fondly condescending toward Muggles ("Bless them!") and has no real understanding of them at all. As for Molly, there's no indication whether she does or doesn't share his views. She's only concerned that his fondness for tinkering and for Muggle artifacts is more important to him than getting ahead at the Ministry, getting the money and the recognition that his talents deserve. But she doesn't care about money for its own sake, or she'd heartily approve of the Twins and their money-making pranks and gadgets. (Note that it's the Ton-tongue Toffees like those used on Dudley that she confiscates before the QWC. She certainly doesn't approve of that little incident.) BetsyHP: > Molly has always been a bit squirrely about Muggle stuff, IMO. Her > fit over Arthur's stitches, her quick turnaround on Hermione, her > opening commentary about the Muggles in the subway... I just sense > something there. > > I wouldn't go so far as to say that Molly is full out anti-muggle, > but she does seem a bit suspicious of outsiders, and muggles are that by definition. And so I especially see her having issue with Arthur taking up Muggle-rights to the detriment of his career and the family finances. Carol: The whole WW is completely at a loss when it comes to understanding Muggles. Even Arthur is primarily interested in the technology which he considers to be a substitue for magic (and, like Bob Ogden in the Pensieve scene, with the helplessness of Muggles when confronted by magic). Arthur does try to make conversation with the Dursleys (and reproves them for not saying good-bye to Harry) but he has no more understanding of them and their idea of "normality" than they do of him. Arthur may be a step closer than Molly to empathizing with Muggles, but that's hardly her fault. Blame what passes for Muggle Studies at Hogwarts. (And her reaction to Hermione has nothing to do with hermione's being a Muggleborn. She believed the Daily Prophet story about Hermione two-timing Harry.) I absoluetly don't see her "having issue" with Arthur's taking up Muggle rights, only his obsession with plugs and batteries and so forth affecting his career. Let's face it; he's as obsessed with Muggle artifacts as we are with the HP books, and that's pretty pathetic. :-) If he really knew about and understood Muggles, surely he'd know how we dress! > Betsy Hp: > I find the Weasley family dynamics rather fascinating myself. And I > was getting bored of all the speculative theories, so thought I'd > bore the list in my own way. Carol, who also prefers character analysis to speculation and appreciates the shift in focus From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Feb 13 23:30:12 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 23:30:12 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164929 va32h: > Well, I have to disagree with your entire premise. I detest wild > improbable theories that have to do with completely random premises, > including such old favorites as: > > 1) Any "Good" character is secretly ESE! > 2) Any "Bad" character is secretly good! > I think JKR does plenty of convential things in her > stories...the "extreme" plot twists, like Pettigrew being Scabbers or > Crouch Jr. being both alive and impersonating Moody all year long, > come with concepts and characters that aren't fully explained, or > explained at all, until the book in which they are revealed. Why > would we suspect that Scabbers was a wizard who had faked his own > death 13 years ago, when we didn't even know the word Animagus or the > name Peter Pettigrew until PoA? Why would we think Barty Crouch Jr. > had faked his death, when we didn't even know of such a person until > GoF? Pippin: We knew as early as the first book that some wizards could transform themselves into sentient animals, because the cat reading a map turned out to be Professor McGonagall. We knew that fake deaths were a possibility because Voldemort himself wasn't really dead. Biting Goyle and then falling asleep was clearly unbelievable behavior for a rat, as Ron told us. So it's not true that these plot twists came completely out of the blue. Rowling has said enough about hints, clues, red herrings and 'elements of a detective story' to make a hidden killer a distinct possibility, IMO, and where can a killer hide except among the good guys? The question of who is trustworthy is a "live" issue, maybe not as far as Harry is concerned, but certainly for the readers. Rowling has said that to answer the question of whether Snape is good or evil would take away the whole point of Book Seven, so much as some of us would like to declare the matter settled, it isn't. And until we know, we can't say with certainty which characters are "Good" and which ones are "Bad." It's possible that Harry will outgrow the need to see people as "good" or "bad" and realize that they are free agents who can make choices that are one or the other. Pippin From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 01:04:11 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:04:11 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Portraits In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164930 --- "justcarol67" wrote: > > bboyminn wrote: > > > > Well, first and foremost, the Fat Lady isn't NUTS. > > She is not as nutty as Mrs. Black or Sir Cadagon, > > so, not being nuts, she is able to act more > > rationally. But she is far from realized. ... But > > what about letting Sirius Black into the Gryffindor > > Tower simply because ...? > > Carol responds: > But don't you have it backwards? The Fat Lady refused > to admit Sirius Black .... Sir Cadogan let Black into > Gryffindor Tower....I certainly agree that Sir Cadogan > isn't a "rational person," but we can't judge the Fat > Lady's capacities by his. > bboyminn: Oy Vey! Mea Culpa! You, and others who contacted me off line, are absolutely right. The Fat Lady did not allow Sirius Black in. But I still stand by what I said. The Fat Lady is not nuts, so she is more easy to interact with and more rational then other nutty portraits but she is not as realizes as the Headmaster's portraits. > Dov wrote: > > > > The concept of "leaving an imprint" is from the > > > conversation about ghosts, ... > > bboyminn responded: > > > > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cfm?id=80 > > > > Q: All the paintings we have seen at Hogwarts are of > > dead people. They seem to be living through their > > portraits. How is this so? If there was a painting of > > Harry's parents, would he be able to obtain advice > > from them? > > > > JKR-A: "...they are not as fully realised as ghosts, > > as you have probably noticed. The place where you see > > them really talk is in Dumbledore's office, primarily; > > the idea is that the previous headmasters and > > headmistresses leave behind a faint imprint of > > themselves. They leave their aura, almost, in the > > office and they can give some counsel to the present > > occupant...." > > > >Carol: > Thanks for providing that quote. But Dov is also right. > Snape uses the word "imprint" to describe ghosts in HBP: > ... So both the portraits in DD's office... and the > Hogwarts ghosts are "imprints" of a dead witch or > wizard or of that person's soul). > > While the dictionary definition of "imprint" doesn't > give us much help with regard to JKR's use of the > word... bboyminn: I think you are placing way too much emaphasis on JKR's use of a common word and concept - imprint. Just because Snape used the word and then JKR used the word doesn't not mean they are using them in the same way and in the same context. JKR clarified her statement. The Headmasters leave behind a faint imprint of themselves, an AURA, in the office of the Head, that gives them the added intelligence to 'give some counsel to the present occupant'. This AURA or faint residue that they leave behind clearly allows the existance of a level of 'realization' that allows them to be of some value to the new Head. I'm not saying other portraits are not of value, they clearly are able to do limited jobs. But they don't have the added essense that allows them to 'give counsel' they way the Head's portraits can. Once again I trot out a bit of information that I am absolutely sure I read, but have never been able to find a reference to. I'm sure JKR said in some interview that a small bit of the portrait subject is added to the portrait to magically animate it. More than animate it, to give it personality. So, a bit of skin, a drop of blood, maybe some hair, some physical essense of the person is added to the portrait, and it is from this that the Portrait derives it's personality. But even still, in general, it is never more than an actor playing a role. A very convincing actor playing a very convincing role, but an actor none the less. The difference is, because of the Aura left behind, the Heads are better actors than normal portraits. > Carol: > > So is a portrait a kind of two-dimensional, fully > colored pseudo-ghost with limited mobility but all > five senses intact? (If the Fat Lady couldn't feel > that knife, why was she so terrified?) bboyminn: Oh, you had to bring that up, and it just so happens that I have a theory on it (like you didn't already know that). So, what was the Fat Lady scared of, she can't be killed because she is not alive. I think this goes back to the actor playing a role. On one hand she plays the role of someone who has been attacked and reacts appropriately. Very good acting I might add, a bit 'hammy', but still good. But on another level I think it is actors vanity. She fears that if her painting is too damaged and can not be restored then she will loss her job, she will lose the role of The Fat Lady on the stage of life (OK, the stage of portrait life). Metaphorically speaking, "The Fat Lady" show will close. As to the senses, just as stage and TV actor pretend to eat and pretend other sensory interaction, doesn't meant they are eating or experiencing them. Portraits are actors, but they have a very dynamic and free-form stage on which to play. They have their own closed universe in which to play out their roles. They have other characters to interact with in their private portrait universe. That makes for very dynamic role playing. The actor play Violet and the actor playing the Fat Lady many have real life history and may be playing out the role they lived. Or they may simply be playing the role of friend in the confines of their current portrait universe. Persumably, even if they lived at different times in history, they have personality characteristics that would naturally bring them together to play out their roles as friends on the portrait stage. > Carol: > > Of course, a witch or wizard can have only one ghost > (if he or she so chooses) but multiple portraits, even, > conceivably, both a ghost and a portrait though we > haven't seen any character with both. ... bboyminn: Back to my unreference theory of a drop of character essense being added to each portrait. A ghost really is that person in every way, shape, and form. By clinging to earthly life, they cling to the earthly identity of this incarnation. I think if you truly pass on, you retain aspect of your earthly identity but you take on a higher more general spiritual identity. This gets a bit metaphysical, so I won't go into detail; none the less it serves the discussion. So, by staying behind as a ghost, what you are really clinging to is you current earthly identity and everything that goes with it except a tangible physical presence in the worth. Instead you have an INtangible physical presence. Portraits have, based on my unreferenced theory, a bit of the person they emulate attached to them that they can draw on. That is, a bit of skin, a drop of blood, a strand of hair, whatever. But that small trace is hardly more than a clue, hardly more than a well written script for the 'actor' to follow. So, a portrait can be very well realized, but can never truly be the person they portray. Note that while only one ghost can exist, because only one person existed from which to creat that ghost, there can be many many one man stage shows of Mark Twain going on at the same time. For every portrait that exists, a drop of blood was given for that portrait to draw on. Just as every one man show, draws on the same bank of information regarding Mark Twain. Consider that drop of blood a biography of the character being portrayed, each actor is drawing from the same biography. But here is an odd thought. If there are several portaits of Phineas Nigellus in existance, do they argue with each other, do the disagree? If Dumbledore asks one of them to deliver a message, do they argue over who is actually going to do it? Do they share a common bank of knowledge, or does the knowledge of each individual portrait grow independant of the other portraits? Or do they all sit down to tea once a day and hash out the details? Enquiring minds want to know. Here is my hierarchy of realization - - People - Ghosts . . - ghost-ish apparitions from the Brother Wand Effect . . . - Headmaster's Portraits . . . . - General Magical Portraits . . . . . . - vague cast-spell signature brought forth by the Prior Incantato Spell (hardly more that identifiable images, lights, whisps of smoke, etc...) > Carol: > > ... > > Ghosts and portraits, whatever they are, are not the > spirit or the soul of the dead person. Nor are they > animated by fragments of soul, or they would be > Horcruxes, and only a murderer can create a Horcrux. bboyminn: Sorry, I'm confused. I agree that portraits are not the spirit or soul of a dead person, but how can ghost not be EXACTLY that. They are souls who have clung to earthly life and identity rather than moving on. Maybe you are making a point, and I am completely missing it, but ghost are indeed the soul and spirit of a person. Portraits, on the other hand, do not draw on the soul of a person, but magically transform a small bit of that person into a form of historical and personality biograph that they can draw on. Again, actors playing a role, but with deep, yet still limited, insight into their character. I wish I could find that reference to a bit of tissue from a living person being used to create a portrait. I've tried searching for it, but as I recall it was such a small part of a larger discussion, that it is unlikely to stand out. And it was a long time ago that I read it. I have search and I haven't found it. But I'm absolutely sure I read it somewhere. Frustrating... For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 01:16:26 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:16:26 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Portraits In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164931 > bboyminn: > But here is an odd thought. If there are several portaits > of Phineas Nigellus in existance, do they argue with > each other, do the disagree? If Dumbledore asks one of > them to deliver a message, do they argue over who is > actually going to do it? Do they share a common bank of > knowledge, or does the knowledge of each individual > portrait grow independant of the other portraits? Or > do they all sit down to tea once a day and hash out > the details? Enquiring minds want to know. zgirnius: Just a small contribution to the discussion: there aren't other copies of the person in other portraits. There's one, and he moves from portrait to portrait. If Phineas Nigellus is at Hogwarts, there's a picture sans occupant hanging at 12 GP. This is first introduced in PS/SS when Harry gets a Chocolate Frog Card of Dumbledore, which shortly thereafter becomes blank. "You didn't think he sticks around all the time, did you?" (or words to that effect) are what Ron says to Harry. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 01:48:15 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:48:15 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Portraits In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164932 bboyminn wrote: > > I think you are placing way too much emaphasis on JKR's use of a common word and concept - imprint. Just because Snape used the word and then JKR used the word doesn't not mean they are using them in the same way and in the same context. > > JKR clarified her statement. The Headmasters leave behind a faint imprint of themselves, an AURA, in the office of the Head, that gives them the added intelligence to 'give some counsel to the present occupant'. > > This AURA or faint residue that they leave behind clearly allows the existance of a level of 'realization' that allows them to be of some value to the new Head. Carol again: But an imprint is not an aura. She has merely substituted one metaphor for another without clarifying. And neither an imprint nor an aura is "a faint residue" (your definition). I think the use of "imprint" for both ghosts and portraits *is* significance. You're sweeping away my argument, not answering it. > Carol earlier: > > Ghosts and portraits, whatever they are, are not the spirit or the soul of the dead person. Nor are they animated by fragments of soul, or they would be Horcruxes, and only a murderer can create a Horcrux. > > bboyminn: > > Sorry, I'm confused. I agree that portraits are not the > spirit or soul of a dead person, but how can ghost not be > EXACTLY that. They are souls who have clung to earthly > life and identity rather than moving on. Maybe you are > making a point, and I am completely missing it, but > ghost are indeed the soul and spirit of a person. Carol: Look again at Snape's words: "A ghost . . . is *the imprint of a departed soul* left upon the earth" (HBP Am. ed. 460). The ghost is *not* the wizard's soul (which may or may not be the same thing as a spirit). He or she is the *imprint* of a *departed* soul. The soul itself has left the earth. It has gone where all souls go when someone dies, presumably beyond the Veil. Only its *imprint* (something akin to a shadow or footprint???) is left behind on earth. What Harry will encounter if he goes beyond the Veil will not be ghosts. Ghosts linger on earth, unwilling to leave the places where they spent their lives. The spirits or souls of the dead have left the earth behind. To use Snape's word, they have "departed." They will be, I think, something more substantial than ghosts, something like the "echoes" that came out of the wand, the Self without a mortal body subject to age and disease. Or maybe they will be wholly insubstantial but able to perceive and be perceived as they looked in life. Of course, I'm only guessing, but the "imprint of a departed soul" *cannot* be the same thing as the departed soul itself. Carol, hoping that her point is clearer now and sure that the double use of "imprint" is no coincidence From puduhepa98 at aol.com Wed Feb 14 02:40:37 2007 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:40:37 EST Subject: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164934 >Jeremiah >snip> As far as the letter: I would assume a few things that DD would have written. 1)He would have told Petunia that her sister died and 2) He would have told her that she needs to take Harry in so he can be safe. I do, however, think (and this is where I jump into the world of speculation) DD would have talked about LV's attack. This is my guess because I feel that Petunia, knowing more than she lets on, would have known that her sister went into hiding, was all caught up in the Order and I base this on her saying in "The Keeper of the Keys" (I hope that's the right chapter in PS/SS when Hagrid arrives) that her sister "got herself blown up" because of James. Whatever else is anyone's guess. Nikkalmati Yes, we have several indications that Petunia is aware of the WW in ways Vernon is not, and why not? She had a sister who was a witch. But I do not think DD arrived that evening with the letter in his pocket and left it and Harry on the doorstep without notice or a prior agreement. Much of what you speculate about would have been in that letter, but I don't think that was their first communication. Notice as Vernon was leaving for work that morning he failed to notice a large tawny owl over his house. I think that owl was coming for Petunia and in the letter it was carrying DD informed Petunia of Lily's death and his need for a place for Harry. I don't think Petunia first learned of the tragedy when she found Harry on the doorstep. Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From technomad at intergate.com Wed Feb 14 02:55:56 2007 From: technomad at intergate.com (Eric Oppen) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:55:56 -0600 Subject: Dumbledore as chess-player Message-ID: <008d01c74fe3$b3e50650$d9570043@D6L2G391> No: HPFGUIDX 164935 I was rereading PS/SS, and it occurred to me that the scene on the tower was presaged there---in the big chess game where Harry, Ron and Hermione are taking the places of chessmen. Ron, if you'll recall, was the one in charge of the game. He told Harry and Hermione where and how to move. He also deliberately sacrificed himself to win the game. It's been theorized before that Ron _is_ Dumbledore---we know that time travel can work in the Potterverse. JKR has said that he isn't, but there are resemblances, and before D'dore's hair went white, we saw in the flashback in CoS that it was "auburn," which is a sort of up-market way of saying that it's a shade of red. When Ron let himself be taken out in the chess game, Harry and Hermione were both horrified, but Ron told them that it was the only way. And at first, he looked like he was dead. Could this have been a "rehearsal" for the events of Book Six? Dumbledore deliberately sacrificing himself so that the DEs would get out of the school, and so that Snape could be on the fast-track to influence with V'mort? From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 03:37:58 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 03:37:58 -0000 Subject: Weasley Family Dynamics (was:Re: The Molly Question (long!)...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164936 > >>Betsy Hp: > > I'd unleashed the hounds. But pulling back a bit, I agree > > that Molly is more than likely supposed to be more a character of > > comedy than anything else. A "Mrs. Bennet" (of "Pride and > > Prejudice") type I think. > >>Carol: > Do you really think so? Betsy Hp: Oy, that's as nice as I get with regards to Molly, Carol. Rather than emotionally abusive, she's... funny. Yeah. > >>Carol: > Mrs. Bennett is a grown-up Lydia, formerly a pretty young flirt and > still flighty and brainless. Betsy Hp: So far, so Molly. > >>Carol: > her one ambition is to marry off her daughters. Betsy Hp: Right. Molly's sole ambition is to get her sons into the Ministry, and probably marry off Ginny (who's fixated like a little duckling onto the WW's most eligible bachelor, so no worries for Molly there). > >>Carol: > Neither she nor Mr. Bennett ever disciplines the girls, who do as > they please (within the limits allowed by their society) whether > it's play the piano, read a novel, or run off after the soldiers. > They're not expected to help at home ("We ar quite able to keep a > cook, Mr. Collins!") Betsy Hp: Mrs. Bennet runs her home at the level of her social rung. A gentleman's household should have a cook. But the Bennet girls do have talents. They aren't completely wild. The issue with the Bennet household is the wrong sort of ambition, not complete negligence. > >>Carol: > Molly expects her sons (and presumably Ginny) to help with the > de-gnoming or cutting up the potatoes (IIRC). Betsy Hp: And she sends them all off to boarding school. Again, keeping her family on their social rung. > >>Carol: > She also tries to maintain discipline, though her idea of doing so > is to yell at them, send a Howler, go through their pockets using > Accio, or burn their order forms. It's a lot more than Mrs. Bennett > does. Betsy Hp: I disagree. And actually, the way Molly completely misses the point of what went wrong with the twins is exactly like Mrs. Bennet misses the point of her girls' social interactions. What I do think the two women have in common is their tendency to descend into histrionics and shrieking. They're both rather emotional and excitable. Which is where the comedy is supposed to come in I think. > >>Carol: > > Molly may be primarily a comic figure, and she certainly presents as > much of a contrast in her way to Arthur (usually as lax a > disciplinarian as the more intellectual but still ineffectual Mr. > Bennett), but she also genuinely cares about her children and their > futures and about Harry. Betsy Hp: Yes, I think Arthur is a lot like Mr. Bennet too. But I'm not sure how Molly loving her children makes her different from Mrs. Bennet. Mrs. Bennet was very concerned about her daughters' future, and I always took the concern as genuine. > >>Carol: > > Mrs. Bennett, superficial and shallow, loves the silly, > flirtacious, and ultimately promiscuous Lydia above the more > intelligent, steady, and sensible Elizabeth and Jane. Betsy Hp: Ah. See I wouldn't say Mrs. Bennet *loves* Lydia more, but she certainly *understands* Lydia more. Just as Molly has a better connection with Ginny and the twins than she does with Ron (or, IMO, Percy for that matter). But I'd say if asked she'd say she loved them all the same. > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > I think Arthur didn't like that his cause wasn't taken seriously > > while Molly didn't like that Arthur was taken for his cause. > >>Carol: > I don't really understand this last sentence, but as I understand > it, Molly doesn't like the way Arthur's affection for Muggles (or > Muggle artifacts) holds him back at the Ministry. > Betsy Hp: Molly would like Arthur to get over his interest in Muggles and their treatment at the hands of Wizards. She wants Arthur to get over his cause and work on moving up the Ministry ladder. Whereas Arthur is frustrated that no one at the Ministry is taking his issue, his cause, seriously. > >>Carol: > The Twins and Molly view Arthur quite realistically, IMO, as a > loveable eccentric. > Betsy Hp: Arthur is lovable and he is eccentric. But he's also quite right about the way wizards view muggles. Unfortunately, Molly cannot see that side of Arthur. So she sees him wasting his time on a worthless cause all for the sake of a silly little hobby. > >>Carol: > I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you see Muggle rights as > some sort of cause for Mr. Weasley, who certainly doesn't approve > of the Twins' conduct toward Dudley or Willy Widdershin's blocking > Muggle toilets, but he's also rather fondly condescending toward > Muggles ("Bless them!") and has no real understanding of them at > all. Betsy Hp: Well, Arthur does sacrifice his Ministry career to take up the cause of Muggle treatment, so yeah I do see it as "some sort of cause" for him. That he's not perfect at it is fine, IMO. Adds character interest. > >>Carol: > As for Molly, there's no indication whether she does or doesn't > share his views. Betsy Hp: Obviously, given the examples I've raised previously, I disagree. > >>Carol: > > But she doesn't care about money for its own sake, or she'd > heartily approve of the Twins and their money-making pranks and > gadgets. Betsy Hp: As soon as they start to make money, Molly *does* approve. > >>Carol: > (Note that it's the Ton-tongue Toffees like those used on Dudley > that she confiscates before the QWC. She certainly doesn't approve > of that little incident.) Betsy Hp: That they were continuing to waste their time on pranks. She doesn't say a word about Muggle abuse. > >>Carol: > > I absoluetly don't see her "having issue" with Arthur's taking up > Muggle rights, only his obsession with plugs and batteries and so > forth affecting his career. Betsy Hp: Exactly. That's how Molly sees Arthur's cause: an obsession with plugs and batteries. Arthur is wasting his time in a dead end section of the Ministry when he should be working to move onto other, more popular and powerful areas. Whereas Arthur would like his section of the Ministry to become more powerful so that wizards would start taking seriously the question of abusing muggles. > >>Carol: > Let's face it; he's as obsessed with Muggle artifacts as we are > with the HP books, and that's pretty pathetic. :-) If he really > knew about and understood Muggles, surely he'd know how we dress! Betsy Hp: Or funny. I think JKR sees the Weasleys as a good source of comedy. But I do think Arthur's interest in muggles goes a bit beyond electricity. That he was actually angry at the twins in GoF suggests he believes what he says. Betsy Hp From jnoyl at aim.com Wed Feb 14 03:22:27 2007 From: jnoyl at aim.com (James Lyon) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:22:27 -0700 Subject: Weasley Family Dynamics Message-ID: <1B0126D8-BC11-4268-9A50-A2CBF14BB5CB@aim.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164938 Molly only seems to have two settings--mean and nasty or smothering. She insults the twins when Ron-insecure-git becomes a prefect, she says that now all her sons were prefects. I find very few canon episodes where she is not yelling at her kids or trying to control someone's life. How does she treat Sirius--as a child with brain damage and emotional disorders. Now, we might say that Sirius did meet those conditions, but her treatment of him, in front of Harry and regarding Harry, was "the tongue that castrates." Add bastard!Snape into Sirius's enjoyment of being "home" again, and you have some of the best torture-of-the-soul that anyone has been put through--and Dumbles seems to approve. Her first three sons were smart enough to get out of the house when the getting was good and do not want to spend any more time under her thumb then they can help. Then, poor Ron, going from the neurotic mother to the neurotic Hermione. Molly wears the pants at the Burrow and, if Ron marries Hermy, she will wear the pants in their house. I can just see Ron being over shadowed by his successful wife while their children spend their childhood in various child care institutions. For all of us that don't care for Ron that much, we see wife!hermy as the ultimate payback. The thing in canon through the first six books is that the good guys get punished, the bad guys skate, and no one ever comes to Harry's defense (and I don't count Dumbles very limited defense of Harry to the Wizengamot). But, don't get me started on all of Dumbles missteps, inadequacies, cruelty, neglect, and hubris. The man should have retired 50 years ago. Draco throws Cruci- and Harry sends Sectumsempra, and Harry gets in trouble and nobody questions Draco or Harry over the self- defense issues and the attempted unforgivable. One thing that Harry should be very clear about by now is that there is no justice and nobody sees "just Harry." Thanks to Molly and Vernon, Harry would be justified to determine that every family must have a designated yeller and a submissive partner, with the kids either brow-beaten or spoiled rotten. James From juli17 at aol.com Wed Feb 14 04:41:46 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 23:41:46 EST Subject: Thoughts on Portraits Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164939 zgirnius: Just a small contribution to the discussion: there aren't other copies of the person in other portraits. There's one, and he moves from portrait to portrait. If Phineas Nigellus is at Hogwarts, there's a picture sans occupant hanging at 12 GP. This is first introduced in PS/SS when Harry gets a Chocolate Frog Card of Dumbledore, which shortly thereafter becomes blank. "You didn't think he sticks around all the time, did you?" (or words to that effect) are what Ron says to Harry. Julie: Which makes me wonder if the more interesting question about Portrait!Dumbledore is just how many portraits he has, and where they are. Besides dispensing advice to Harry (even if he is only an imprint of his former self, he still retains some of the wisdom he gained in life), his greater presence in DH may be in relaying criitcal information back and forth. While it wouldn't be particularly intriguing for him to do so between known locations (Hogwarts, Order Headquarters) and wizards (from McGonagall to Harry, say), Portrait!Dumbledore is likely to be as withholding as the original if he deems it necessary. Will we immediately know where all of the portraits are located? Why do I suspect not? For instance, someone mentioned that Abelforth might have a portrait of Dumbledore. This could be one way for Abelforth to make his presence known in DH, if Dumbledore is relaying information from him, perhaps even without identifying who is giving him said information. If Portrait!Dumbledore vouched for the person providing the information, it's likely that information will be accepted, his "mistaken" trust in Snape notwithstanding. And speaking of Snape, if he is DDM he will need a way to get information to the Order while keeping his identity a secret, unless he wants a one way trip to Azkaban (at least until and if he is cleared of Dumbledore's "murder"). What if he has access to an undocumented portrait of Dumbledore? It's certainly one way for him to pass on critical information about Voldemort and the DEs. So how many portraits of Dumbledore exist? Where are they? And will one or more of them remain "hidden" until some point late in the book when its location will be revelatory? Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Wed Feb 14 08:09:36 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 08:09:36 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Portraits In-Reply-To: <45D258C0.000009.03048@JUSTME> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164940 I have nothing against portraits of people we never met when they were alive, but JKR said portraits were a sort of watered down version of the real thing, so I really don't want to see a watered down version of Dumbledore. If he's in book 7 it should be in a flashback not a portrait. Eggplant From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 14 12:39:11 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 07:39:11 -0500 Subject: Chocolate Frogs & Portraits In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001b01c75035$21047ee0$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 164941 --zgirnius wrote- >>>This is first introduced in PS/SS when Harry gets a Chocolate Frog >Card of Dumbledore, which shortly thereafter becomes blank. "You >didn't think he sticks around all the time, did you?" (or words to >that effect) are what Ron says to Harry.<<< This really got me to thinking about the process that is used to create portrait vs a photo or chocolate frog. When we are first introduced to the chocolate frog cards, Dumbledore is very much, living at the time. Also, various photos have appeared of other living wizards and witches. For example, Sirius Black's photo appeared on the front of the Daily Prophet. He was animated and able to growl. Yet he was alive and this wasn't even his actual personality, but what the media had created as the ideal image of a crazed, escaped DE. Portraits have the ability to speak and move about from frame to frame, but they must be created in a similar way. I'm wondering if, based on what we know of the other formats, the portrait may be only a creation of the artist's mind, through magic. An expression of the artist or photographer's impression of the character in the portrait. Portraits seem to be more than this, but things aren't always what they seem. It can not be an actual part of the subject's soul which animates the portrait. That would make the portrait a horcrux and would require dark magic. Anyway, these are just my various ramblings and I welcome anyone's opinions. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Feb 14 16:18:19 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:18:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Thoughts on Portraits Message-ID: <15859583.1171469899513.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164942 From: Debi >I have seen, many fantasy and sci fi movies & tv shows with the split person >theme, in all of them when a person gets split into two people, from that >moment on they become two different people. This theme is used in many clone >movies and books also, the clone has the memories up to the point he or she >existed, but from that point on clone and original become two different >people. Bart: Not that JKR knows this, of course, but the clones with the memories of the original go from science fiction into fantasy; Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle (which doesn't only show that uncertainty exists, but very accurately measures the margin of error) kind of guarantees you can't exactly duplicate a human mind. Cloning does occur naturally, by the way; identical twins are clones (although I don't recall if the Pavrati twins are identical). On the other hand, I see dead people speak all the time. Every time I watch a rerun of I LOVE LUCY, pretty much everybody on the screen is dead. therefore... Debbi: >Is it possible that the magic used to make the portraits 'come alive' is the >type that gives them the essence of the person they represent, but from that >point on they become their own original selves? They are still very much >like the person whom they are based on, who that person was at that period >and time, we all change with time and experiences, but then based on that >personality and the very different or narrow views (being pictures they can >travel or experience more than what comes before them) they become a >slightly different 'person'? Bart: It has been established that portraits have memory AND personality. However, the fact that they are capable of original thought (such as Phineas mourning Sirius) implies that there is a piece of the original's soul in the portrait, which sounds kind of dark artish to me. Now, in modern occultism (which JKR has admitted no education in, but that does not mean that she was never exposed to it), the human being has an ephemeral part and an immortal part (the latter could be called "the soul"). The mind is split between the two, where the emotional part of the mind (attached to "I want") is ephemeral, while the rational part of the mind is part of the soul (having worked for a number of years with brain injured children, I can see where the ideas came from). One might magically get around Heisenberg, and duplicate someone's thought patterns, but, without a soul, these duplicates could only think in the moment; they cannot rationally plan for the future. Given this, ghosts would be lower consciousnesses attepting to move on along with the souls. Think of it like the monkey trap; there is a piece of fruit in a jar with a mouth big enough for the monkey to put its hand through, but not enough room for its hand AND the fruit. The monkey, only able to think in the present moment, will not let go of the fruit, and is therefore trapped. Similarly, the lower part of the ghost's mind, unable to think past the present moment, traps the soul just on the other side of the Veil. Bart From tthinc at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 15:16:45 2007 From: tthinc at yahoo.com (tthinc) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:16:45 -0000 Subject: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164943 Nikkalmati: > Yes, we have several indications that Petunia is aware of the WW in > ways Vernon is not, and why not? She had a sister who was a > witch. But I do not think DD arrived that evening with the letter > in his pocket and left it and Harry on the doorstep without notice > or a prior agreement. Much of what you speculate about would have > been in that letter, but I don't think that was their first > communication. Notice as Vernon was leaving for work that morning > he failed to notice a large tawny owl over his house. I think > that owl was coming for Petunia and in the letter it was carrying > DD informed Petunia of Lily's death and his need for a place for > Harry. I don't think Petunia first learned of the tragedy when > she found Harry on the doorstep. Greetings, JK is the only one who can confirm this but, I believe that our dear sweet Petunia is a squib and the angst against her sister is centered around this. That and the fact that she was killed by LV has made her very fearful of the WW. Just a thought. Its really a shame that JK is going to end all this in Book 7. Like to see more. Cheers, tthinc From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 17:25:44 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:25:44 -0000 Subject: Weasley Family Dynamics/ Molly In-Reply-To: <1B0126D8-BC11-4268-9A50-A2CBF14BB5CB@aim.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164944 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, James Lyon wrote: > > Molly only seems to have two settings--mean and nasty or smothering. > She insults the twins when Ron-insecure-git becomes a prefect, she > says that now all her sons were prefects. I find very few canon > episodes where she is not yelling at her kids or trying to control > someone's life. > How does she treat Sirius--as a child with brain damage and emotional disorders. Now, we might say that Sirius did meet those conditions, > but her treatment of him, in front of Harry and regarding Harry, was > "the tongue that castrates." Add bastard!Snape into Sirius's > enjoyment of being "home" again, and you have some of the best > torture-of-the-soul that anyone has been put through--and Dumbles > seems to approve. > Her first three sons were smart enough to get out of the house when > the getting was good and do not want to spend any more time under her thumb then they can help. > Then, poor Ron, going from the neurotic mother to the neurotic > Hermione. Molly wears the pants at the Burrow and, if Ron marries > Hermy, she will wear the pants in their house. I can just see Ron > being over shadowed by his successful wife while their children spend their childhood in various child care institutions. For all of us > that don't care for Ron that much, we see wife!hermy as the ultimate > payback. > The thing in canon through the first six books is that the good guys > get punished, the bad guys skate, and no one ever comes to Harry's > defense (and I don't count Dumbles very limited defense of Harry to > the Wizengamot). But, don't get me started on all of Dumbles > missteps, inadequacies, cruelty, neglect, and hubris. The man should > have retired 50 years ago. > Draco throws Cruci- and Harry sends Sectumsempra, and Harry gets in trouble and nobody questions Draco or Harry over the self- > defense issues and the attempted unforgivable. One thing that Harry > should be very clear about by now is that there is no justice and > nobody sees "just Harry." > Thanks to Molly and Vernon, Harry would be justified to determine > that every family must have a designated yeller and a submissive > partner, with the kids either brow-beaten or spoiled rotten. Alla: It is funny how extremes of the argument can make me disagree with it, even if I would agree with more moderate variety of similar argument. Sure, Molly was cruel to Sirius in his home. Sure she had no right, but I believe that she was jealous of Harry seemingly preferring Sirius to her and she acted out. Did I like it? No way, but neither that makes her a horrible human being in my book. Oh, and her oldest sons were smart to get away from her? Could you provide any canon for that? Because it seems to me that Charlie and Bill do jobs they love and the requirements of those jobs are to live abroad. I see no indication in the books that the reason they took their jobs was to get away from their mother. But I will be happy to say that I am wrong. In fact I seemed to remember Bill having quite a wonderful time with his mother when they came to see Harry act in TWT, I do not remember him screaming get away from me woman, instead he was laughing about her stories about her time in school, no? And yeah, poor Ron indeed. To each their own indeed, but I adore him - sweet, loyal, wonderful friend, who indeed has the insecurites, but who does not have them? What you are saying about Harry, well, sure there seem to be no justice for him so far and sure not many adults come to his defense, no argument about it. But I also seem to remember Ron and Hermione standing by him, pretty much all the time and JKR pretty much indicated that they are his family and isn't family support what matters the most? And as to the crap Harry comes through, well there is a reason JKR wants to apologise to him, hehe. I am just hoping that the happy ending will follow. JMO, Alla. From alcuin74 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 17:44:04 2007 From: alcuin74 at yahoo.com (alcuin74) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:44:04 -0000 Subject: Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164946 tthinc: > Greetings, > > JK is the only one who can confirm this but, > > I believe that our dear sweet Petunia is a squib and the angst against > her sister is centered around this. That and the fact that she was > killed by LV has made her very fearful of the WW. > > Just a thought. > > Its really a shame that JK is going to end all this in Book 7. Like > to see more. > > Cheers, tthinc Alcuin: Petunia can't be a squib since her and Lily's parents were Muggles. By definiton, a squib is someone born of wizarding parentage yet who does not have magical abilities. p.s. - my apologies if this ends up as a double post. Having connection problems here. From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Feb 14 17:51:11 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:51:11 -0000 Subject: Weasley Family Dynamics In-Reply-To: <1B0126D8-BC11-4268-9A50-A2CBF14BB5CB@aim.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164947 James Lyon: > Molly only seems to have two settings--mean and nasty or smothering. > She insults the twins when Ron-insecure-git becomes a prefect, she > says that now all her sons were prefects. Magpie: So are you suggesting that she says that to the twins because she's trying to make Ron less secure? Because I'd say that usually the twins are very close to Molly and it's Ron who's more cut down by Molly with the struggles over dress robes and jumpers etc. She is insulting the twins in that scene, and they say so, but I don't think it has anything to do with Ron, just that in her mind she's "succeeded" in getting another Prefect. I imagine that in her mind what she means is that all the kids who had a chance in hell of being a Prefect was one, since the twins let her down with the pranks. That's one of Molly's weirder moments, but it totally works for her character. James: > Then, poor Ron, going from the neurotic mother to the neurotic > Hermione. Molly wears the pants at the Burrow and, if Ron marries > Hermy, she will wear the pants in their house. I can just see Ron > being over shadowed by his successful wife while their children spend their childhood in various child care institutions. For all of us > that don't care for Ron that much, we see wife!hermy as the ultimate > payback. Magpie: I admit I agree with you there. I don't see much joy in Ron's future being married to Hermione--the two as a pair are depressing to me from Ron's pov. James: > The thing in canon through the first six books is that the good guys > get punished, the bad guys skate, and no one ever comes to Harry's > defense (and I don't count Dumbles very limited defense of Harry to > the Wizengamot). But, don't get me started on all of Dumbles > missteps, inadequacies, cruelty, neglect, and hubris. The man should > have retired 50 years ago. Magpie: That's a little extreme, imo. Rowling loves administering her payback. The bad guys might never get punished enough so that we can always looke forward to more punishment, and of course Harry suffers as the hero, often unfairly, but if there's one problem I would never say Rowling has it's in not punishing her bad guys. James: > Draco throws Cruci- and Harry sends Sectumsempra, and Harry gets in trouble and nobody questions Draco or Harry over the self- > defense issues and the attempted unforgivable. One thing that Harry > should be very clear about by now is that there is no justice and > nobody sees "just Harry." Magpie: I really don't think Harry was so hard done by after Sectumsempra. Draco got sliced up as a result of his attempted Crucio, so he didn't get off easy. I would hope that if everyone was questioned, hearing about Draco's attempted Unforgivable that would not lead the faculty to Ginny's loyal girlfriend conclusion that oh, in that case it was just lucky Harry had something good up his sleeve. I seem to recall McGonagall responding to Harry's claims that Malfoy goaded him into attacking him on the Quidditch Pitch by saying he still did a stupid thing. Ironically, Snape doesn't even punish Harry at all for the Sectumsempra, exactly. He says he thinks Harry is a liar and a cheat and deserves detention every Saturday--for his year-long use of the book. Ultimately neither boy gets talked to about his use of Dark Magic, and they're both lucky about it. (If it was discussed Malfoy might still have gotten off easier since whatever he was going to do, he didn't finish the curse and possibly wouldn't have been able to complete it any more than Harry, who has also attempted that Unforgivable without reprimand, albeit only against people he thinks are Death Eaters.) I don't think Harry would have come off well as a character if after that scene he was focused on it being unfair because it was self-defense rather than having twinges of conscience. That said, the thing about Molly that I love is I think that she is in many ways a flawed character with sometimes genuinely bad beliefs. Whether or not we think she was so willing to believe the worst in Hermione because she was Muggle-born, I do think she has issues with Hermione she doesn't have with Harry, perhaps because she's a girl, but perhaps also for other reasons. If she'd known about the GoF-fight I don't think she'd have taken Ron's side quite as clearly as she takes Harry's after reading about Hermione's "Scarlet Woman" behavior--yet even there she doesn't not send Hermione an Easter Egg, she just gives her a small one. But there are times where she is just blatantly insensitive, almost stumbling into judgements that go against what's presented as the attitude of the good guys. She does seem to have a sort of big heart and small mind--which is not to say she's always wrong. I love it when she calls Arthur on his writing loopholes into his laws for himself, and sometimes I think he's the one that can be more of a hypocrite. Perhaps this goes back to the Bennett analogy. However Molly is seen to wear the pants in the family, I think Arthur (unlike Ron would with Hermione) sees himself as the cleverer of the two (some of also pointed out a slight class imbalance as well). I think sometimes that leads him to feel okay about only consulting his own counsel on things where he lets himself off the hook. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 17:52:22 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:52:22 -0000 Subject: Portraits In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164948 Ronin wrote: > It can not be an actual part of the subject's soul which animates the portrait. That would make the portrait a horcrux and would require dark magic. Carol responds: I agree. I think that the painted image (which probably resembles the living witch or wizard more closely than any Muggle painting could) contains something analogous to the "brains" of the Four Founders placed in the Sorting Hat or even the "memory" of the sixteen-year-old Tom Riddle placed in the diary *before* it became a Horcrux. Neither the "brains" nor the "memory" is the same as a soul bit, which can only be created by an act of murder. Whatever animates the portraits is an "imprint" of a soul, not the soul itself or a part of the soul. And I still say that Snape's use of the same word, "imprint," in relation to ghosts ("the imprint of a departed soul") is more than coincidence. I just wish that JKR's intended meaning were clearer! Carol, eating Valentine's chocolates that the apartment managers left on her doorknob and wishing there were more than four! From jnferr at gmail.com Wed Feb 14 18:13:42 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 12:13:42 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8ee758b40702141013o793d9542s5ff8807e05cf778f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164949 > > tthinc: > > > Greetings, > > > > JK is the only one who can confirm this but, > > > > I believe that our dear sweet Petunia is a squib and the angst > against > > her sister is centered around this. That and the fact that she was > > killed by LV has made her very fearful of the WW. > > > > Just a thought. > > > > Its really a shame that JK is going to end all this in Book 7. > Like > > to see more. > > > > Cheers, tthinc > > Alcuin: > > Petunia can't be a squib since her and Lily's parents were Muggles. > By definiton, a squib is someone born of wizarding parentage yet who > does not have magical abilities. montims: from *J K Rowling at the Edinburgh Book Festival, Sunday, August 15, 2004.* *Is Aunt Petunia a Squib?* Good question. No, she is not, but?[Laughter]. No, she is not a Squib. She is a Muggle, but?[Laughter]. You will have to read the other books. You might have got the impression that there is a little bit more to Aunt Petunia than meets the eye, and you will find out what it is. She is not a squib, although that is a very good guess. Oh, I am giving a lot away here. I am being shockingly indiscreet. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 18:08:37 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:08:37 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164950 > Magpie: > I really don't think Harry was so hard done by after Sectumsempra. > Draco got sliced up as a result of his attempted Crucio, so he > didn't get off easy. I would hope that if everyone was questioned, > hearing about Draco's attempted Unforgivable that would not lead the > faculty to Ginny's loyal girlfriend conclusion that oh, in that case > it was just lucky Harry had something good up his sleeve. I seem to > recall McGonagall responding to Harry's claims that Malfoy goaded > him into attacking him on the Quidditch Pitch by saying he still did > a stupid thing. Alla: LOL. If there is one thing I vehemently disagree with you about, that is of course Draco dearest. I do not seem to remember that Draco on Quidditch pitch attempted to use unforgivable on Harry, so yeah, I share Minerva POV - he did stupid thing there. Scene in bathroom reads as something very different to me. Magpie: > Ironically, Snape doesn't even punish Harry at all for the > Sectumsempra, exactly. He says he thinks Harry is a liar and a cheat > and deserves detention every Saturday--for his year-long use of the > book. Ultimately neither boy gets talked to about his use of Dark > Magic, and they're both lucky about it. (If it was discussed Malfoy > might still have gotten off easier since whatever he was going to > do, he didn't finish the curse and possibly wouldn't have been able > to complete it any more than Harry, who has also attempted that > Unforgivable without reprimand, albeit only against people he thinks > are Death Eaters.) Alla: I am still absolutely convinced that the **only** reason Snape does not talk about Sectusemptra much is because he is afraid that Draco is going to end up in Azkaban. And Snape did not punish Harry? Detentions are punishment, are they not? Magpie: I don't think Harry would have come off well as a > character if after that scene he was focused on it being unfair > because it was self-defense rather than having twinges of conscience. > Alla: As long as we do not forget that it **was** self defense, I do not mind Harry having twinges of conscience. As I also mentioned in the past, this is great that Harry having twin- ges of conscience, but I hope he will not have more twinges than self- defense with the wrong course. He was not looking for a fight at all, Malfoy started it and I was scared for Harry when I started reading this scene, I really did. Distraught enemy can do things to you that when such enemy is in normal state of mind IMO. So, yeah, I truly think that the books do not glorify killings etc, but I think that it may be that JKR goes for self-defense as special case. JMO, Alla. From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Wed Feb 14 18:26:14 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 10:26:14 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702141026x5450b1dfl695a330be3088c06@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164951 tthinc: > Greetings, > > JK is the only one who can confirm this but, > > I believe that our dear sweet Petunia is a squib and the angst against > her sister is centered around this. That and the fact that she was > killed by LV has made her very fearful of the WW. > > Just a thought. > > Its really a shame that JK is going to end all this in Book 7. Like > to see more. > > Cheers, tthinc Alcuin: Petunia can't be a squib since her and Lily's parents were Muggles. By definiton, a squib is someone born of wizarding parentage yet who does not have magical abilities. p.s. - my apologies if this ends up as a double post. Having connection problems here. ========================================== Jeremiah: Alcun has it right. Petunia and Lily's parents were Muggles as far as we know. JKR has expressed that in amny ways and that's why it is said that Lily was Muggle-born and Half-Blood and what-not. Flich is a Sqib and Mrs Arabella Figg is a Squib because they come from Wizarding families and are not able to produce magic. I believe Petunia's anger comes from her statements in PS/SS where she rants in the cabin about how Lily would come home from "that school" with pockets full of frog spawn and turning mice into teacups. She rants about how porud her parents were of having a witch in the family. Now, nobody knows, except JKR, whether or not there had been a witch or wizard in the family previously but there isn't any evidence which supports them being wizards. (As far as I know. tthinc, if you have other evidence then I'd like to know what it is). Seeing as how Slughorn refers to her as Muggle-born (I think that's right... I don't think it was Half-Blood) then I'd say tthinc was having some confusion as to what a Squib is. And that's totally understandable. What interrests me is how much Petunia knows. We can see she knows about Dementors... she looks outside the window nervously after Harry tells her about Dudly's attack. Harry (the story is told from harry's perspective) assumes Petunia knows nothing so he sees that action as Petunia being paranoid about the neighbors hearing. I say she was looking to see if the Dementors were still there. There are subtle things that Petunis knows. Subtle actions on her part which shows her knowledge of the WW. How about anyone else? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 18:14:28 2007 From: dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com (dragonkeeper) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 10:14:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <209225.91345.qm@web53303.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164952 There may be more to Petunia's story that she was willing to tell in the first book. I believe that the way she told her story about her sister was out of jealousy rather than spite. She might have been a witch later than her sister, Lily, became a witch and went to Hogwarts. And maybe things at school didn't go very pleasantly for Petunia. Maybe she wasn't well liked or maybe it was about who she hung out or liked a lot. I wonder if Petunia did go to Hogwarts if she had a thing for James but James liked Lily instead and maybe Snape offered her a potion to help her and things went wrong. So many possiblities. Perhaps, Petunia's parents didn't approve of her marriage to Vernon or Dudley wasn't accepted by the Potters. It could explain some of her behavior to Dudley and Harry. But we won't find out till this summer David --------------------------------- 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Feb 14 18:38:42 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:38:42 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived Message-ID: <1624673.1171478323080.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 164953 From: Jeremiah LaFleur >What interrests me is how much Petunia knows. We can see she knows about >Dementors... she looks outside the window nervously after Harry tells her >about Dudly's attack. Harry (the story is told from harry's perspective) >assumes Petunia knows nothing so he sees that action as Petunia being >paranoid about the neighbors hearing. I say she was looking to see if the >Dementors were still there. There are subtle things that Petunis knows. >Subtle actions on her part which shows her knowledge of the WW. > >How about anyone else? Let's see now. A muggle family, with familiarity in the Wizarding World. Quite a riddle, isn't it? Bart From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Wed Feb 14 19:16:33 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:16:33 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702141116h32690d41sdeb3390628aeaf8b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164954 >Jeremiah >snip> As far as the letter: I would assume a few things that DD would have written. 1)He would have told Petunia that her sister died and 2) He would have told her that she needs to take Harry in so he can be safe. I do, however, think (and this is where I jump into the world of speculation) DD would have talked about LV's attack. This is my guess because I feel that Petunia, knowing more than she lets on, would have known that her sister went into hiding, was all caught up in the Order and I base this on her saying in "The Keeper of the Keys" (I hope that's the right chapter in PS/SS when Hagrid arrives) that her sister "got herself blown up" because of James. Whatever else is anyone's guess. Nikkalmati Yes, we have several indications that Petunia is aware of the WW in ways Vernon is not, and why not? She had a sister who was a witch. But I do not think DD arrived that evening with the letter in his pocket and left it and Harry on the doorstep without notice or a prior agreement. Much of what you speculate about would have been in that letter, but I don't think that was their first communication. Notice as Vernon was leaving for work that morning he failed to notice a large tawny owl over his house. I think that owl was coming for Petunia and in the letter it was carrying DD informed Petunia of Lily's death and his need for a place for Harry. I don't think Petunia first learned of the tragedy when she found Harry on the doorstep. Nikkalmati ================================== Jeremiah: Actually, I do believe that at the end of the chapter "The Boy Who Lived" it is said that harry would be awakened by Petunia's screams as she set out the milk bottles in the morning. I'm sure you can interpreate that as Petunia "freaking out" about finding the baby of her dead sister... assuming Petunia knew that her sister was going to die... I'm sure Petunia knew Lily was in hiding (IMO, btw) but I see it as a shock that there was a basket on her doorstep and then she read the letter... (whatever was in it) I don't know about any prior arrangements. I also remember Petunia saying how she and Vernon got stuck with Harry. I have always had the feeling that, even though Petunia knows more that she lets on, she was truely shocked to have Harry pop up on her doorstep one morning. She seemed oblivious to anything that had been happening to her sister until she discovered Harry. I do, however, agree that there were messages from DD earlier than the one left with Harry (and I do recall the Tawney Owl on the morning in question) and I would find it amazing that Petunia would be so "calm" (well, calm for Petunia, that is) in the evening with her tea infront of the telly reacting with pursed lips at the question of her sister's son's name. I'm sure that if the Tawney Owl did deliver a message from DD it was as cryptic about Harry's arrival the the Potter's demise as DD has ever been. Prior arrangements, well, if Petunia knew Harry would be on her doorstep under the circumstance that Lily was dead then I can see Petunia shouting at that. Guess I need to re-read. ;) However, I an of the persuasion that the letter with Harry was Petunia's first notice that her sister was dead and that she needed to take Harry in. Any prior arrangements is specualtion (and and educated guess, Nikkalmati, as to what that arrangement would be) but I'm just not convinced that DD would have totally laid out plans with Petunia... he probably had her agree to something very cryptic and then ka-blam! Kid on the doorstep, IMO. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Feb 14 19:26:18 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:26:18 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164955 > > Magpie: > > > I really don't think Harry was so hard done by after Sectumsempra. > > Draco got sliced up as a result of his attempted Crucio, so he > > didn't get off easy. I would hope that if everyone was questioned, > > hearing about Draco's attempted Unforgivable that would not lead > the > > faculty to Ginny's loyal girlfriend conclusion that oh, in that > case > > it was just lucky Harry had something good up his sleeve. I seem to > > recall McGonagall responding to Harry's claims that Malfoy goaded > > him into attacking him on the Quidditch Pitch by saying he still > did > > a stupid thing. > > Alla: > > LOL. If there is one thing I vehemently disagree with you about, that > is of course Draco dearest. > > I do not seem to remember that Draco on Quidditch pitch attempted to > use unforgivable on Harry, so yeah, I share Minerva POV - he did > stupid thing there. > > Scene in bathroom reads as something very different to me. Magpie: I'm not saying she necessarily would have taken the same position here, I was just using it to show that Harry's having his say about how Draco used an Unforgivable and started it all would not necessarily be all there was to it. I doubt it would, actually, given the extent of the damage. I'm sure she gets it's a fight and wouldn't be surprised to learn that Draco started it and fought viciously--the bathroom's destroyed. She seems like a character more likely not looking for reasons this sort of thing is okay, even if she does see times when violence is necessary. > Magpie: > > Ironically, Snape doesn't even punish Harry at all for the > > Sectumsempra, exactly. He says he thinks Harry is a liar and a > cheat > > and deserves detention every Saturday--for his year-long use of the > > book. Ultimately neither boy gets talked to about his use of Dark > > Magic, and they're both lucky about it. (If it was discussed Malfoy > > might still have gotten off easier since whatever he was going to > > do, he didn't finish the curse and possibly wouldn't have been able > > to complete it any more than Harry, who has also attempted that > > Unforgivable without reprimand, albeit only against people he > thinks > > are Death Eaters.) > > Alla: > > I am still absolutely convinced that the **only** reason Snape does > not talk about Sectusemptra much is because he is afraid that Draco > is going to end up in Azkaban. > > And Snape did not punish Harry? Detentions are punishment, are they > not? Magpie: Whatever Snape's reasons for talking or not talking about Sectumsempra, the detentions are not specifically linked to Harry hurting Draco and using Sectumsempra. Snape always wants to punish Harry and give him detention, and when he gives him detention he says, "I think you are a liar and a cheat and you deserve to be in detention with me every Saturday." They've moved on to the question of the book by then, which Harry is lying about. So Harry's getting what's being asked for anyway--no one is on his case for hurting someone else without acknowledging it was self-defense. So Harry's not in a situation where he's being punished for hurting Draco for no reason and if only people knew what really happened things would be different. Nothing about Harry's punishment hinges on Draco's innocence. On the contrary, the whole detention shifts quickly to Snape being a jerk and wanting an opportunity to tease Harry because of his own issues--Snape, Sirius, etc. > Magpie: > I don't think Harry would have come off well as a > > character if after that scene he was focused on it being unfair > > because it was self-defense rather than having twinges of > conscience. > > > > Alla: > > As long as we do not forget that it **was** self defense, I do not > mind Harry having twinges of conscience. > > As I also mentioned in the past, this is great that Harry having twin- > ges of conscience, but I hope he will not have more twinges than self- > defense with the wrong course.> He was not looking for a fight at all, Malfoy started it and I was > scared for Harry when I started reading this scene, I really did. > Distraught enemy can do things to you that when such enemy is in > normal state of mind IMO. Magpie: I don't think anyone, least of all Harry, forgets that Malfoy started it (when does he ever forget that?), and Malfoy was in a state of mind where he was fighting like a desperate person. But this issue doesn't really effect anything in canon because Harry's *not* be accused of not having a reason to cast his curse or being much criticized for hurting Malfoy. Ginny backs him up on that, Ron brushes the injury aside, Hermione just thinks it's proving her opinion of the Prince and cautions him about Quidditch. The only person we actually hear has actually villified him is Pansy, because she's Draco's girlfriend. Even when we're told the Slytherins are jeering at him it's just described as general jeering. Alla: > So, yeah, I truly think that the books do not glorify killings etc, > but I think that it may be that JKR goes for self-defense as special > case. Magpie: I think she put this scene together very carefully--like a lot of her scenes--so that there's a number of things going on in it. She was certainly careful about the situation in which Harry used Sectumsempra (on the ground, in response to an expected Crucio) and the whole fight in general (Draco vulnerable, Harry *not* being there to fight--in all ways different from their every encounter). But this is why I think it misses a lot of the scene to turn it into Harry unfairly accused of using his potentially deadly curse offensively instead of to keep himself getting hurt. That's not an issue in the book at all. Nobody cares. It *would* be an issue if Harry were on trial for murder or something, but he just gets detention. (Had he only said, "Sectumsem--" in some other situation and been stopped, I doubt he'd have gotten more than lost points.) Harry's anger at Snape and Snape's detentions are not about making Harry feel badly--or feel anything--about hurting Draco. Draco, in fact, practically disappears as a character and a concern until the end of the book. I think JKR very deliberately makes any issues about Harry's use of the curse between Harry and himself (or Harry and God, or however one sees that sort of thing). He's free to take Ginny's attitude and justify himself completely through self-defense while Draco pays the price for his daring to use Crucio in the hospital wing. -m From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Wed Feb 14 19:31:58 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:31:58 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: <209225.91345.qm@web53303.mail.yahoo.com> References: <209225.91345.qm@web53303.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <948bbb470702141131r3ffe9950m388a7f314b0841d2@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164956 There may be more to Petunia's story that she was willing to tell in the first book. I believe that the way she told her story about her sister was out of jealousy rather than spite. She might have been a witch later than her sister, Lily, became a witch and went to Hogwarts. And maybe things at school didn't go very pleasantly for Petunia. Maybe she wasn't well liked or maybe it was about who she hung out or liked a lot. I wonder if Petunia did go to Hogwarts if she had a thing for James but James liked Lily instead and maybe Snape offered her a potion to help her and things went wrong. So many possiblities. Perhaps, Petunia's parents didn't approve of her marriage to Vernon or Dudley wasn't accepted by the Potters. It could explain some of her behavior to Dudley and Harry. But we won't find out till this summer David --------------------------------- Jeremiah: Well, not to be a picky-person (though I am...) I do not, under any circumstances (except if JKR says so and explains it well enough) believe for a single second that 1) Petunia ws ever invited to go to Hogwarts as a student- maybe to attend gradutation or some other event- or that 2) ever actually took the time to really get to know Lily's friends in the WW or 3) ever attended Hogwarts as a student. I also doubt that Petunia had a "thing" for James. (well, except contempt...) I'd think Petunia could have married anyone she liked and her parents would have been fine with it incomparison to Lily marrying any wizard and her parents being completely thrilled with the proposition. JKR has also stated (maybe you didn't hear about it... I'm always suprised when I write something and the get a reply saying "look here, silly" and JKR has totally refuted my idea) that Petunia is not a Squib and that Petunia will not be the one doing magic later in life. It seems our pursed-lipped Petunia doesn't had a dropo of magic in her. :( [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 19:55:14 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:55:14 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164957 > Magpie: > I'm not saying she necessarily would have taken the same position > here, I was just using it to show that Harry's having his say about > how Draco used an Unforgivable and started it all would not > necessarily be all there was to it. I doubt it would, actually, > given the extent of the damage. I'm sure she gets it's a fight and > wouldn't be surprised to learn that Draco started it and fought > viciously--the bathroom's destroyed. She seems like a character more > likely not looking for reasons this sort of thing is okay, even if > she does see times when violence is necessary. Alla: Well, I would hope that Minerva is the kind of character who does think that **that sort of thing** as you call it or **self-defense from unforgivable curse** as I call it, is Okay indeed. Otherwise I would be very dissapointed, personally :) > Magpie: > Whatever Snape's reasons for talking or not talking about > Sectumsempra, the detentions are not specifically linked to Harry > hurting Draco and using Sectumsempra. Snape always wants to punish > Harry and give him detention, and when he gives him detention he > says, "I think you are a liar and a cheat and you deserve to be in > detention with me every Saturday." They've moved on to the question > of the book by then, which Harry is lying about. So Harry's getting > what's being asked for anyway--no one is on his case for hurting > someone else without acknowledging it was self-defense. Alla: Not sure I understand, you are saying that Snape does not punish him for that? How so? Without Harry doing sectusemptra Snape would have no reason to give him detentions at all, book or no book IMO of course. Magpie: > So Harry's not in a situation where he's being punished for hurting > Draco for no reason and if only people knew what really happened > things would be different. Nothing about Harry's punishment hinges > on Draco's innocence. On the contrary, the whole detention shifts > quickly to Snape being a jerk and wanting an opportunity to tease > Harry because of his own issues--Snape, Sirius, etc. Alla: Sure, he is a jerk, but I am just talking how it started, hehe. > Magpie: > I don't think anyone, least of all Harry, forgets that Malfoy > started it (when does he ever forget that?), and Malfoy was in a > state of mind where he was fighting like a desperate person. But > this issue doesn't really effect anything in canon because Harry's > *not* be accused of not having a reason to cast his curse or being > much criticized for hurting Malfoy. Ginny backs him up on that, Ron > brushes the injury aside, Hermione just thinks it's proving her > opinion of the Prince and cautions him about Quidditch. The only > person we actually hear has actually villified him is Pansy, because > she's Draco's girlfriend. Even when we're told the Slytherins are > jeering at him it's just described as general jeering. Alla: Well, I am not sure I follow again. Yes, Harry does not get criticized that he had no reason for hurting Malfoy, so maybe that is because he indeed had a reason to do so? Self defense, I mean? I am not sure what your point here is, sorry. > Magpie: < BIG SNIP> >I think JKR very deliberately makes any issues > about Harry's use of the curse between Harry and himself (or Harry > and God, or however one sees that sort of thing). He's free to take > Ginny's attitude and justify himself completely through self- defense > while Draco pays the price for his daring to use Crucio in the > hospital wing. Alla: Well, I just think that the fact that JKR makes Harry having any issues about that scene does not mean that Harry **has to** have issues about this scene, besides the fact that he used the weapon that he had no clue how it works. But what else would one use against the one who attepts to cause you horrible pain but the curse marked for enemies? As I said, I think Harry was stupid for thinking about Sectusemptra, Draco was something else IMO and I absolutely resist the argument that their responsibilities in this scene are even **close** to one another. Imagine if Harry used I don't know, stupefy and Draco hit his head on the bathroom floor and died. Would you begrudge Harry for using that curse as well? Because I would not see any issues then whatsoever, Harry would use the curse he knows works well and he was up against one of the most dangerous curses in the WW. And he was down on the floor himself. But Malfoy would you know, still be dead. I am guessing that Harry would be a bit upset even in that event. Any normal human IMO would be upset after killed someone even in self defense, but should such human be upset for the longest time? IMO no, it is just in this situation Harry used curse that made Malfoy bleed a lot. Would it been better if by complete accident Malfoy died painlessly? JMO, Alla From kamilaa at gmail.com Wed Feb 14 18:51:15 2007 From: kamilaa at gmail.com (Kamil) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 12:51:15 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: <1624673.1171478323080.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <1624673.1171478323080.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164958 > From: Jeremiah LaFleur > >What interrests me is how much Petunia knows. We can see she knows about > >Dementors... she looks outside the window nervously after Harry tells her > >about Dudly's attack. Harry (the story is told from harry's perspective) > >assumes Petunia knows nothing so he sees that action as Petunia being > >paranoid about the neighbors hearing. I say she was looking to see if the > >Dementors were still there. There are subtle things that Petunis knows. > >Subtle actions on her part which shows her knowledge of the WW. I like the theory that Lily and Petunia's parents were both Squibs themselves. It'd explain why they were so delighted to have a witch in the family as well as how Petunia would know so much more than expected about the WW. It'd even go a bit of a way down the road of explaining why Jo said the was being "shockingly indiscreet" by answering the 'is Petunia a squib' question the way she did. Or, yanno, not. But until Jo proves otherwise it'll remain one of my favorite theories. Kamil From jnferr at gmail.com Wed Feb 14 20:00:02 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:00:02 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702141131r3ffe9950m388a7f314b0841d2@mail.gmail.com> References: <209225.91345.qm@web53303.mail.yahoo.com> <948bbb470702141131r3ffe9950m388a7f314b0841d2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40702141200u2b3d588k8042f6360631ba8b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164959 > > > Jeremiah: > > Well, not to be a picky-person (though I am...) I do not, under any > circumstances (except if JKR says so and explains it well enough) believe > for a single second that 1) Petunia ws ever invited to go to Hogwarts as a > student- maybe to attend gradutation or some other event- or that 2) ever > actually took the time to really get to know Lily's friends in the WW or > 3) > ever attended Hogwarts as a student. montims: matching you pick for pick - students don't graduate from schools in the UK - they graduate from university. (At least, that was the case in the 80s - they may have adopted American customs now - any British readers want to correct me here?) I can't imagine Hogwarts is any different in this respect, since in all the years Harry went there, there was never a sniff of a celebration (even though they would have been different years, so that is not really reliable). However, I would imagine they just leave when their NEWTS are done... We have seen a Yule Ball, but no non-student relatives were invited to that... Certainly, I agree Petunia never went to Hogwarts as a student, as JKR has made it quite clear that she is not magical. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jnferr at gmail.com Wed Feb 14 20:15:05 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:15:05 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702141116h32690d41sdeb3390628aeaf8b@mail.gmail.com> References: <948bbb470702141116h32690d41sdeb3390628aeaf8b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40702141215t4d82ec85r71b4a5d6067be6e6@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164960 > > Nikkalmati > > Yes, we have several indications that Petunia is aware of the WW in ways > Vernon is not, and why not? She had a sister who was a witch. But I do not > think DD arrived that evening with the letter in his pocket and left it > and > Harry on the doorstep without notice or a prior agreement. Much of what > you > speculate about would have been in that letter, but I don't think that was > their > first communication. Notice as Vernon was leaving for work that morning he > failed to notice a large tawny owl over his house. I think that owl was > coming for Petunia and in the letter it was carrying DD informed Petunia > of > Lily's death and his need for a place for Harry. montims: actually, it says: "None of them noticed a large tawny owl flutter past the window"... I have had the thought that maybe the owl was bringing a letter to Prof McGonagall, who - as a cat - was on the corner of the street when Vernon left, reading a map. She wouldn't have needed a map to Privet Drive, as she was already there. Was she tracking Hagrid's progress??? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From annemehr at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 20:21:55 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:21:55 -0000 Subject: Back to The Plan (Was:Re: Father Figures) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164961 > Carol earlier: > > Still, in light of what actually did happen (and possibly the death > of Sirius Black after all Lupin went through to prove him innocent to > HRH), I can see why [Lupin would] be unhappy with himself. If only > he'd just explained everything to Dumbledore in the first place. DD > would have talked to Black, found out about Scabbers, had Pettigrew > arrested, and Voldie would still be vapor. > > > > Annemehr, previously: > > Well okay, but *if* DD would have wanted to *prevent* LV regaining a > > physical body, by preventing Pettigrew's escape, then why isn't LV a > > vapor *now,* when he so easily could be? > > Carol responds: > Sorry to be unclear. I was trying to present what I see as Lupin's > perspective, his realization that his actions (and persistent > inaction) in PoA had undesirable consequences. Annemehr: No, I understood you. My point was to be that Lupin's perspective depends very much on what he understands about what happened that night. If Wormtail's escape was *for the best,* then Lupin will not wish that he had done anything different. You and I disagree on whether it *was* for the best, but we shall see in July. (You have said in another thread that you prefer literary analysis to speculation. Actually, so do I, but analysis is on shaky ground until we see exactly what's going on -- not that that is stopping us! Meanwhile, those of us who also enjoy a bit of speculation must take full advantage of the time left to us.) Carol: > I also really don't understand your question. Let me try to figure > this out. You think that if Lupin had confided the truth to Dumbledore > (which I think, or hope, he regrets not doing), that Dumbledore would > have questioned Sirius Black (which I also think) and discovered the > truth about Pettigrew. Of course, in terms of the story, especially > GoF, Pettigrew's escape is absolutely essential. But why would > *Dumbledore* want it to happen? Annemehr: My question was rhetorical. I think Dumbledore knew the truth about Pettigrew all along. I think that the fact that DD did not try to revaporize LV in the Ministry Atrium goes to support the idea that this particular re-embodiment of LV is *part* of DD's Plan (the plan which we see in ch. 37 of OoP existed at *least* as early as Harry's first year at Hogwarts, since he talks about his failure to tell Harry the prophecy *then* as a flaw in that plan). Back to the question of Lupin's regrets again -- well, if he knows he facilitated the plan's proceeding, he will not have regrets per se. Sadness that there is a war at all, yes, but not regrets about his own actions. > Carol: > Why didn't Dumbledore vaporize LV in the MoM? (Not that the question > has anything to do with my point on Lupin's possible regrets, but, > okay. I'll answer.) As you say, he knew about the Horcruxes, but I > don't think that's all there is to it. I *do* think DD is "above such > brutality" since, unlike Harry, who can use Love, he'd have to use an > Unforgiveable Curse to kill LV--but the attempt would be futile, > anyway, since LV wouldn't be killed. DD also knows that it's Harry's > job, not his, to destroy Voldemort. Annemehr: Well, these are central questions! First of all, I do not see what is so noble about killing LV with Love rather than Avada Kedavra. Love is toxic to Voldemort. Would it not be the moral equivalent to killing him with a poisoned kiss? To hugging the breath out of him? Or, indeed, to just using an AK? >From the Radio City Music Hall reading of 8/1/06: ------------------------------------------------------------------- J.K. Rowling: Well, I believe that almost anyone can redeem themselves. However, in some cases, as we know from reality -- if a psychologist were ever able to get Voldemort in a room, tape him down, take his wand away, I think he would be classified as a psychopath (crowd laughs). So there are people for whom redemption is not possible. -------------------------------------------------------------------- So, redemption is not possible for LV. He is a psychopath who *cannot* love. If Harry exposes him forcefully to Love, there is *no choice* available to LV to repent and accept it, and so to live; love to him is an instrument of torture or an agent of his death. And don't anyone tell me this series is "all about choices." This is how LV is written. As for it being Harry's job to destroy Voldemort, I say we still don't know why that is. Not *really.* Not beyond the fact that we know this is a story about how Harry will in fact deal with him. Even though, yes, we can see that having a mind link to LV (when it's open), being a Parselmouth, and most likely having the power of Possession would confer certain *advantages*. I say that even though I've posited before that Harry will vanquish LV in a battle of wills via mutual possession. It still doesn't tell us why it must *only* be Harry. But Dumbledore certainly seems to know why -- and he's built his plans around it. > Carol: > Oh, I think there's a plan all right, but it mostly involves Harry and > Snape, but it could have been implemented later and more effectively > if Wormtail had not escaped, ending the respite the WW had enjoyed > since Godric's Hollow. I don't see collateral deaths as part of the > plan. Instead, they're an unfortunate consequence of Voldie's return > to his body, which DD can't undo without starting the process over > again. Now, at least, Fudge and the WW know what they're facing if > Voldemort is not destroyed. Unfortunately, thanks to Wormtail's > escape, they, and Harry, are facing those consequences years or even > decades sooner than they might have done if Lupin had only told DD > what he knew about Sirius Black. (And no. I'm not blaming Lupin for > the unforeseen consequences of his unfortunate actions and inactions. > If I blame anybody, it's Voldie for casting the DADA curse.) Annemehr: Well, the collateral deaths are part of the *cost* of having LV be corporeal at this time. It is a huge cost, so there must be a huge reason for DD to have it so. I don't see how revaporising LV would add more to anyone's knowledge of the Hxes than they could have now. It's just more of the same, not new information. That can't be the reason to leave LV in his current body. The fact that you say "Instead, [the collateral deaths are] an unfortunate consequence of Voldie's return to his body, which DD can't undo without starting the process over again." implies that the *process*, i.e. the return of LV to that *particular* body, is essential to the defeat of Voldemort. Which in turn implies that it is, in fact, part of the Plan. Otherwise, DD could arrange for the destruction of the Hxes while Britain enjoyed a time of peace (and LV another sojourn in Albania), and then destroy the remaining part of LV by some *other* hypothetical process. And, Jen R., if you're reading this, this also serves as my reply to your post #164806. The fetal body is something we know next to nothing about, but it doesn't pose any problem for Guilty!DD. It is a part of this process I believe was planned. So again: why didn't DD vaporise LV in the Ministry, even though it would have prevented the current war and consequent deaths of innocents? Because DD knows that doing so would have an even higher price -- and the *only* way he could know that is by knowing how LV is to be finally dealt with, i.e. the Plan. > Carol: > Even if DD wanted Wormtail to escape as you suggest, how could he > possibly have known that Wormtail, regarded by everyone as hopeless at > magic, could possibly restore Voldemort to physical form? He hadn't > heard Trelawney's second prophecy, which didn't occur until the night > before Wormtail's escape. And until that night, DD, like everyone > else, thought that PP was dead and that Sirius Black was his murderer. Annemehr: How could DD possibly know Wormtail could restore LV? Because he knew every bit as well as LV did, what would be required to accomplish the job: some specific magical knowledge, and a hand to wield a wand. That prophecy is completely superfluous to this question. And, we see that Wormtail is not "hopeless" at magic after all, and he had LV's instructions to follow. Why, DD even told Harry, Ron, and thus Scabbers, at the end of Cos, that LV was currently hiding out in Albania -- so Wormtail even knew just where to look for rat friends to point out the way to his Master. Furthermore, DD wasn't reading the Hangleton papers for the personal ads, you know. And no, I'm sure he knew that Pettigrew was alive, just as he knew Sirius was innocent. > Carol, who never dreamed that her suggestion about Lupin's possible > regrets would spawn a Guilty!DD thread! You just never know, do you? Annemehr From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Wed Feb 14 20:25:55 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:25:55 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164962 > > Carol responds: > Of course here's a difference between literary analysis and > speculation. Literary analysis starts with the text, examines it to > find out what it may mean or imply, draws a tentative conclusion, and > then returns to the text to support that conclusion. Although the > conclusion is not definitive--it remains an interpretation--it can at > least be supported with evidence from the text and stand up to > counterarguments, or it can be modified if it turns out to be flawed. > (Look at the various interpretations of "Spinner's End" or > Dumbledore's words in the cave or the events on the tower for > examples.) Speculation starts with "what if" and scrambles frantically > thtough the text to find any bit of evidence (Tom Riddle and Harry > look a little bit alike) to support it. Speculation is fun while the > seventh book is still unpublished but probably pointless after that. Ken: I agree, once we've read DH all speculation stops and literary analysis can begin in earnest. The point of speculation is to tease plot possibilities out from among the clues that are in the text. Unlike literary analysis speculation is not rigidly bound to the text (although I'm not sure literary analysis is either but that's your field not mine). It is partly based on possibilities and shrewd guesses. Its a lot like scientific research or detective work. Here are the facts that we know, what do they mean? What *could* they mean. In this case it is just a game, the game ends on the final page. Carol: > Even speculation should start with a thorough knowledge of canon. Tom > Riddle's black hair cmes from his father, not from Merope. Harry's > black hair comes from James, not from Lily. Lily's mother was a > Muggle, with whom it's highly unlikely that Merope had any contact and > who is now dead. Besides, if Merope had given Lily's mother her powers > (an unprecedented act unless we count Vapormort's accidentally giving > Harry some of his powers at GH), Lily's mother, a noncharacter so far, > would be a witch, not a Muggle, which would make nonsense of Lily's > being a Muggleborn whose parents were "proud to have a witch in the > family." Ken: I disagree, you do not have to *start* from canon. Profitable speculations can run either way: start from knowns and extrapolate beyond them to a conclusion that can be tested (by reading DH), or start with a hunch (which DH will either confirm or make a mockery of) and work backwards to see if any knowns can be made to lead to it. But to be of any use in this case you do have to tie your speculations to canon in some way, at some point, or else all you have is a hunch. Even a raw hunch sometimes pans out, its just the way speculation works. I'm not sure how hair color genes work, do we know for sure that a blond has no black haired ancestor? Do we know for sure that Harry's hair color can *only* come from his father and Tom's *only* from his father? Only Tom comments on a resemblance between himself and Harry but is that so odd, even if there is a true resemblance, in a world where most folks won't even say Tom's assumed name aloud? Maybe not. Is hair color the only resemblance Tom sees? Again, maybe not. I don't think it is necessary for Merope to have passed her powers to Lily's mother, maybe it was just a spark, a magical "seed" of some kind, that germinated in Lily. There is just the barest glimmer of canon support for this and I do not expect that it will turn out to be "true". But I still have to rate it as an interesting speculation. Somehow Lily's Muggle parents happened to have a witch for a daughter. It may be one of those things that is never explained, it is just barely possible that this theory could be verified by DH. Keep in mind that I'm playing the devil's advocate here. I don't have any emotional or intellectual attachment to this theory. I'm just a third party who's looked at it (a bit) and who is saying it isn't *completely* off the wall. My main point is that the technique that spawned it is a legitimate one *at this point*. > Carol: > But let's at least confine our speculation to what's plausible > within the secondary world JKR has constructed. As for me, I prefer > literary analysis, even of an incomplete text, to speculation any day, > if only because its lifespan is not so limited. Ken: I am an avid science fiction reader, a genre where created worlds are the norm and fans are brutal in insisting that authors stay consistent with the rules of their creation. I think my opinion of what is plausible within the Potterverse is as valid as anyone's (including the author's!), but no more so. The trouble is that even though we read the same words we often have very divergent opinions on what they mean. I simply cannot follow your objections to horcrux/Harry *at all* for example. You see an absolute prohibition in the written words, I see almost no restrictions at all. So that is one problem in defining what is plausible. The other major problem with plausibility is that I think we all agree that the author Herself can be inconsistent. That makes it all the harder to agree on what is and what is not plausible in *this* created world. I enjoy your literary analysis and your speculations equally. I have a much broader view of what speculations are plausible than you and some others have. I think that is in part because I am a technologist professionally and I can see quite clearly how poorly magical technology is defined in the Potterverse. This might be because the author has not carefully thought through the implications of her magical technology (a very tall order in a series this long and complex). Or it might just be because she hates to give anything away before the end and so she leaves many things vague. It does open the field to many speculations and I have trouble seeing how the Potterverse as we have it now excludes very many of them, even though it is highly unlikely that many of our theories will turn out to be "true". The end of all things draws nigh. There will be much weeping and shredding of theories! Ken From muellem at bc.edu Wed Feb 14 20:41:05 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:41:05 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164963 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ken Hutchinson" wrote: > > I disagree, you do not have to *start* from canon. Profitable > speculations can run either way: start from knowns and extrapolate > beyond them to a conclusion that can be tested (by reading DH), or > start with a hunch (which DH will either confirm or make a mockery of) > and work backwards to see if any knowns can be made to lead to it. But > to be of any use in this case you do have to tie your speculations to > canon in some way, at some point, or else all you have is a hunch. > Even a raw hunch sometimes pans out, its just the way speculation works. > colebiancardi: You do need a basis in canon. Otherwise, I could make up the most thrilling theories and not have anything to do with the HP world, yet call it a theory/speculation for HP. That doesn't make sense. You can work backwards, if you have all the pieces up front. One of my speculations after reading HBP was to timeline & speculate that Snape knew Regulus and that Regulus's death was the reason why Snape turned. However, I used canon to make my point. I couldn't have made my speculation without the small references in OotP & HBP and certain quotes from DD throughout the series. But my point is that I didn't go off half-cocked with a theory that didn't have some solid canon behind it. There is no canon on the Merope/Lily/Lily's mother theory. Just wild guessing to fit into some person's fanfic. If that is all it took, I could write MYSELF as a major character in the 7th book - after all, who needs canon? colebiancardi From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 21:06:12 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:06:12 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164964 Alla wrote: > I am still absolutely convinced that the **only** reason Snape does > not talk about Sectusemptra much is because he is afraid that Draco > is going to end up in Azkaban. > > And Snape did not punish Harry? Detentions are punishment, are they > not? Carol responds: But how could Draco end up in Azkaban for a spell that he didn't complete? It wouldn't even show up on his wand. And Harry has also attempted to cast Crucio twice, once interrupted like Draco's, once completed but unsuccessful because he didn't "mean" it (didn't have sufficient sadism to sustain it). So should Harry be in Azkaban, too? And, in any case, how was Snape supposed to know that Draco had tried to cast an Unforgiveable Curse? He heard Myrtle screaming and came hurtling in, saw the blood and the cuts and knew exactly which Dark curse *Harry* had cast, healed the curse, took Draco to the hospital wing, and ordered Harry to wait. When he returned, he questioned Harry about where he had learned that curse and used Legilimency to see his own Potions book in Harry's mind. Not once did he ask Harry *why* he had cast that curse or what Draco had done to provoke Harry. How could Snape be protecting Draco from Azkaban if he didn't know that he had tried (and failed) to cast an Unforgiveable? I agree that Snape is protecting Draco by not questioning Harry (and I don't think that questioning Draco would get him very far given Draco's belief that Snape, who has just saved his life, is trying to steal his glory), but I think what he's protecting him from is not Azkaban but expulsion, which would leave him vulnerable to being murdered by DEs or Voldemort himself for his failure to fulfill his mission. Harry, too, could have been expelled (McGonagall says so, and Harry actually *used* a deadly curse rather than merely attempting a nonlethal Unforgiveable), but Snape gives him detention instead. And, yes, Snape punished Harry, but not for using a Dark curse. The punishment is for lying about where he learned the curse and cheating all year long in Potions (using what Harry doesn't realize is Snape's own notes)--and yet Snape doesn't act on Harry's greatest fear of the moment, telling Slughorn where his Potions "brilliance" is coming from. Rather than thinking about what he has done, Harry just wants his book back, and Snape is on the same wavelength. He may have a secondary motive for the detentions, which last into June and would have lasted till the end of the year if Draco hadn't brought the DEs into Hogwarts, to keep the two boys apart. Snape probably knows perfectly well that Harry is tailing Draco and doesn't want him mixed up in deadly matters that don't concern him. But Magpie's point is that neither boy is punished for using, or trying to use, a Dark curse. And she's correct. Carol, wishing that she could see beneath the surface of Snape's words and actions to the thoughts and motives that prompt them From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 21:12:53 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:12:53 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164965 > Alla wrote: > > > I am still absolutely convinced that the **only** reason Snape does > > not talk about Sectusemptra much is because he is afraid that Draco > > is going to end up in Azkaban. > > > > And Snape did not punish Harry? Detentions are punishment, are they > > not? > > Carol responds: > But how could Draco end up in Azkaban for a spell that he didn't > complete? It wouldn't even show up on his wand. And Harry has also > attempted to cast Crucio twice, once interrupted like Draco's, once > completed but unsuccessful because he didn't "mean" it (didn't have > sufficient sadism to sustain it). So should Harry be in Azkaban, too? Alla: I actually did not say that Draco should be in Azkaban, I only said that Snape was afraid that he **would be**, so to answer the modified question - yes, I think that if somebody else knew about Harry's casting curses like that, he would have a big chance to end up in Azkaban, whether he meant it or not. Should he be there? No, not IMO. Not unless he truly meant it. Harry of course. And how they would have learned? I don't know - legilimency, veritaserum, take your choice. JMO, Alla From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Wed Feb 14 21:15:56 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:15:56 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164966 > > Magpie: > We're not talking about areas of research or science. This is not a > real world. Ken: Of course it is not the real world. It's just a game we play with ourselves while waiting for DH. Who can guess where the author is going? There are no Nobel prizes, the revolution will not be televised. A few people *might* win the respect of their peers by outguessing the rest of us. A *few*. Science has to deal with apparently contradictory facts and incomplete evidence. We have the same situation here. I don't care that much about this particular theory although I think it is imaginative and interesting. But I do think that some non-literary techniques can be valuable at this point in the game of guessing the conclusion. > Magpie: > The good reason for not considering the possibility that Merope > could have passed her powers to Lily is that *there is nothing in > canon telling me to consider it.* That's not closed mindedness, it's > understanding that the story consists of the words on the page and > that's it. Ken: The words on the page say that Tom Riddle passed some of his power to Harry. We all agree. So is it inconceivable that Merope passed (and I agree not her powers directly) *something* to Lily's mother? I'd have to say no, it is not inconceivable. We have canon proof that some kinds of magical power can be passed between wizards. Perhaps only Slytherin's heirs can do this, speculation on my part. The notion that Merope might have passed *something magical* to Lily's mother is a simple (but speculative, I agree) extension of that "known fact". Do we have any evidence that these two people were ever in close proximity. NO! The only thing we can say about that is that Merope was in London and London is one place in England that many residents of England will visit during their lifetimes. It is plausible that they could have been near each other at some point. > Magpie: > If this idea is introduced later I'll certainly consider > it, but there is no "real Wizarding World" to appeal to here. Could > an extreme theory turn out to be true? Ken: You are right. We have no way to run any experiments save thought experiments. Albert Einstien, a reasonably accomplished physicist, was a proponent of this method. Ultimately the only experiment that counts is the reading of DH. That is where the "real" wizarding world lies. > Magpie: > > The trouble with this and other backwards theories is that there is > no literary reason in canon to begin considering the idea--even if > it turned out to be true a good case wasn't made for it. Ken: But we've given you some. They are the barest traces of clues but they really are in canon. They might not be clues to anything as it turns out. They are some things that one of us noticed that look interesting. > > Magpie: > And if the turning of Muggle to Wizard via the "gifting" of one's > status to another were included in canon we'd have some reason to > consider at least something like this. JKR always introduces a > magical concept before it becomes important. My problem isn't that I > can't explain this transfer through magical theory, since magical > theory isn't a real field of study, it's that it's not ever in > canon. In fact, it rather destroys one of the main points of canon, > the Muggle/Wizard separation. That's a major thing to introduce into > your magical system. > Ken: We have seen the magical gifting from Tom to Harry so it is in canon. The separation between Muggle and Wizard is not absolute, Lily and Hermione are both proof of that. So there is nothing to destroy on that front. If this notion turns out to be true it is both in canon and introduced before it was important. So, what's your real complaint here? > Magpie: > > Sure the theory being given here will either turn out to have > happened or not in DH. The same could be said for a theory that > Harry and Hermione are really the same person, that Snape is really > a woman, that Harry and Ron are really twins separated at birth and > born in Wisconsin. Ken: I think this notion is a *little* more tightly linked to canon than those! ;-) > > Magpie: > It does > frustrate me when people think that stuff they made up is canon, or > that being able to make a theory fit canon is the same as proving it > to be true. I'm not at all unhappy at people doing this kind of > speculating; I think the only time it causes any problems is when it > claims to be something else. Ken: Am I making stuff up and calling it canon? Maybe others were, if you think I was I can assure you it is only because I can't remember canon with the laser-like accuracy that some of you can. There is no "proving" these theories in the scientific sense. All I am saying is that some scientific methods can be used to generate ideas. When you are brainstorming ideas you are lucky to get one in a hundred that is worth anything. If you don't brainstorm you won't get that one. I agree that the ideas do have to find support in canon and I think this one can claim *some*. I don't expect it to be confirmed in DH, but it could be and if it were I think Rowling has laid the groundwork for our acceptance of it. Ken From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Wed Feb 14 21:29:34 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:29:34 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702141215t4d82ec85r71b4a5d6067be6e6@mail.gmail.com> References: <948bbb470702141116h32690d41sdeb3390628aeaf8b@mail.gmail.com> <8ee758b40702141215t4d82ec85r71b4a5d6067be6e6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <948bbb470702141329o4557eaf6k13bdb64c8e29a0a1@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164967 > Nikkalmati > > Yes, we have several indications that Petunia is aware of the WW in ways > Vernon is not, and why not? She had a sister who was a witch. But I do not > think DD arrived that evening with the letter in his pocket and left it > and > Harry on the doorstep without notice or a prior agreement. Much of what > you > speculate about would have been in that letter, but I don't think that was > their > first communication. Notice as Vernon was leaving for work that morning he > failed to notice a large tawny owl over his house. I think that owl was > coming for Petunia and in the letter it was carrying DD informed Petunia > of > Lily's death and his need for a place for Harry. montims: actually, it says: "None of them noticed a large tawny owl flutter past the window"... I have had the thought that maybe the owl was bringing a letter to Prof McGonagall, who - as a cat - was on the corner of the street when Vernon left, reading a map. She wouldn't have needed a map to Privet Drive, as she was already there. Was she tracking Hagrid's progress??? ==================================================== Jeremiah: Rock on for finding that quote! Since we know that "none of them noticed" as the owl fluttered "past the window" I would have to say that the owl definitely wasn't for the Dursleys. Why? Becasue what we know of owls is this: when the letter/package/what-have-you is for you... the owl will make itself known. they're a bit pushy (and I would be too if I wanted to go hunting for food or take a nap or do other owl-ish things). McGonagall is definitely an option. Maybe she needed the map sent? Maybe she was getting correspondence from Deddalus Diggle (ok, I just pulled that one out of my... well, from nowhere 'cause I like the name and she mentions him in the first chapter, too...) OR... maybe it was DD sending a message to Arabella Figg (I just love her full name. Has anyone picked up on that yet?) Of course, we don't know if Figg was living in Privet Drive at this time. we only know she was living there at some point after Harry's arrival but it is possible she was there and knew the Dursleys. I wonder how long she was under cover? Or if Petunia knew that Arabella Figg was a Squib and was loyal to DD then it would make is safe for Harry to stay with her for Dudley's birthday and such. Yes, i know Arabella told Harry that she had to make things miserable for him while staying with her, but even if Petunia new about her Vernon probably didn't and Petunia is just "in" on the secret (not caring how well or how badly Harry is treated) and enjoys hearing how much misery Harry went through on each visit. I vote for Aragella or the man behind the Grassy Knoll! (The owl could also be for Professor Plum in the Library with a Lead Pipe... just some humor...lol). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Feb 14 21:54:25 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:54:25 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164968 > Alla: > > Well, I would hope that Minerva is the kind of character who does > think that **that sort of thing** as you call it or **self-defense > from unforgivable curse** as I call it, is Okay indeed. Otherwise I > would be very dissapointed, personally :) > Magpie: I'm saying that I think Minerva, as a teacher, would make a distinction between the general question of Unforgivables being something to defend yourself from and students opening each other up in bathroom brawls. I can imagine her acknowledging that Harry was acting in self defense but have a harder time imagining her going from that to, "Nothing else you could have done, Harry. It's great you did that." I think she'd want to deal with things beyond making sure there was self-defense involved. > > Magpie: > > Whatever Snape's reasons for talking or not talking about > > Sectumsempra, the detentions are not specifically linked to Harry > > hurting Draco and using Sectumsempra. Snape always wants to punish > > Harry and give him detention, and when he gives him detention he > > says, "I think you are a liar and a cheat and you deserve to be in > > detention with me every Saturday." They've moved on to the question > > of the book by then, which Harry is lying about. So Harry's getting > > what's being asked for anyway--no one is on his case for hurting > > someone else without acknowledging it was self-defense. > > Alla: > > Not sure I understand, you are saying that Snape does not punish him > for that? How so? Without Harry doing sectusemptra Snape would have > no reason to give him detentions at all, book or no book IMO of > course. Magpie: And you think Snape shares your view of when he's got reason to give Harry detention? I don't. But regardless, even if Sectumsempra was the event that led to the detentions it is not what the detentions are *about,* which is important. Neither Harry nor Snape associates the detentions with Draco's injury, not even at the moment the detentions are given. The detention as a punishment for hurting Draco is intentionally not given by Snape, Harry or the narrator, any more than is the idea that Harry's in detention for messing up the bathroom. > Magpie: > > So Harry's not in a situation where he's being punished for hurting > > Draco for no reason and if only people knew what really happened > > things would be different. Nothing about Harry's punishment hinges > > on Draco's innocence. On the contrary, the whole detention shifts > > quickly to Snape being a jerk and wanting an opportunity to tease > > Harry because of his own issues--Snape, Sirius, etc. > > Alla: > > Sure, he is a jerk, but I am just talking how it started, hehe. Magpie: Right, but that's the thing--it's just "how it started." It was the incident that gave Snape and opening to make Harry's life miserable but it's in the past even before they leave the bathroom when the book has become of primary importance. > > Magpie: > > I don't think anyone, least of all Harry, forgets that Malfoy > > started it (when does he ever forget that?), and Malfoy was in a > > state of mind where he was fighting like a desperate person. But > > this issue doesn't really effect anything in canon because Harry's > > *not* be accused of not having a reason to cast his curse or being > > much criticized for hurting Malfoy. Ginny backs him up on that, Ron > > brushes the injury aside, Hermione just thinks it's proving her > > opinion of the Prince and cautions him about Quidditch. The only > > person we actually hear has actually villified him is Pansy, > because > > she's Draco's girlfriend. Even when we're told the Slytherins are > > jeering at him it's just described as general jeering. > > Alla: > > Well, I am not sure I follow again. Yes, Harry does not get > criticized that he had no reason for hurting Malfoy, so maybe that is > because he indeed had a reason to do so? Self defense, I mean? > > I am not sure what your point here is, sorry. Magpie: I mean the OP was about how it wasn't fair that Harry hurt Malfoy in self-defense and no one ever found out the facts, as if Harry was suffering from being falsely accused of hurting Malfoy offensively. But Harry's acting in self-defense ins't a secret and his suffering has nothing to do with the false idea that he wasn't acting in self- defense. > > Magpie: > < BIG SNIP> > >I think JKR very deliberately makes any issues > > about Harry's use of the curse between Harry and himself (or Harry > > and God, or however one sees that sort of thing). He's free to take > > Ginny's attitude and justify himself completely through self- > defense > > while Draco pays the price for his daring to use Crucio in the > > hospital wing. > > Alla: > > Well, I just think that the fact that JKR makes Harry having any > issues about that scene does not mean that Harry **has to** have > issues about this scene, besides the fact that he used the weapon > that he had no clue how it works. > > But what else would one use against the one who attepts to cause you > horrible pain but the curse marked for enemies? > > As I said, I think Harry was stupid for thinking about Sectusemptra, > Draco was something else IMO and I absolutely resist the argument > that their responsibilities in this scene are even **close** to one > another. Magpie: They don't have to be close to one another. Harry certainly isn't comparing them. He doesn't *have to* feel anything--nobody does. Like I said, he's free to take Ginny's attitude that it was good he had something up his sleeve. Harry isn't able to make that leap, completely. He feels twinges of conscience. Some people think it's right for him to feel that, some people think it's wussy, some thing it's a sign that Harry's an extraordinary person. Alla: > Imagine if Harry used I don't know, stupefy and Draco hit his head on > the bathroom floor and died. Would you begrudge Harry for using that > curse as well? Magpie: I wonder why you would make that comparison, actually. In this scenario Harry is using a non-hurtful spell that due to bizarre circumstances led to a death, as opposed to an offensive spell he only knew was to be used again enemies that was, unsurprisingly, potentially deadly in itself. I would certainly feel differently about Harry's using stupefy and I would guess Harry would also (even if he regretted being involved in anyone else's death, even tangentially). Obviously there's never any question that it was wrong of Harry to do *something* in the scene. That's part of what I think is carefully put into the scene. It would be such a different scene if Harry had done what he does in this scenario. But he didn't. Alla: > Because I would not see any issues then whatsoever, Harry would use > the curse he knows works well and he was up against one of the most > dangerous curses in the WW. And he was down on the floor himself. > > But Malfoy would you know, still be dead. I am guessing that Harry > would be a bit upset even in that event. Any normal human IMO would > be upset after killed someone even in self defense, but should such > human be upset for the longest time? > > IMO no, it is just in this situation Harry used curse that made > Malfoy bleed a lot. Would it been better if by complete accident > Malfoy died painlessly? Magpie: I think there is an element of intent to Harry's use of Sectumsempra that is part of that niggling conscience. As to how long one should feel badly about killing someone accidentally, I don't know. Some people feel guilty about that the rest of their lives, probably depending on what kind of accident it was. But if Harry had killed or hurt Malfoy that way I think it would be a different scene, so he'd probably think about it differently anyway. > Ken: > > Of course it is not the real world. It's just a game we play with > ourselves while waiting for DH. Who can guess where the author is > going? There are no Nobel prizes, the revolution will not be > televised. A few people *might* win the respect of their peers by > outguessing the rest of us. A *few*. Science has to deal with > apparently contradictory facts and incomplete evidence. We have the > same situation here. I don't care that much about this particular > theory although I think it is imaginative and interesting. But I do > think that some non-literary techniques can be valuable at this point > in the game of guessing the conclusion. Magpie: And it's a perfectly fine game to be playing--I think it's just more an issue of knowing which game we are playing. If one is actually trying to guess what's going to happen using canon, one generally wants to stick as close to canon as possible. If one is honestly trying to guess what's going to happen one will probably be stricter about things in canon that show that one is wrong. If it's more about just having fun with how different theories could be true until they're not, there's different ways you're going to approach things--and people often get testy when they two get mixed. > > > Magpie: > > The good reason for not considering the possibility that Merope > > could have passed her powers to Lily is that *there is nothing in > > canon telling me to consider it.* That's not closed mindedness, it's > > understanding that the story consists of the words on the page and > > that's it. > > Ken: > > The words on the page say that Tom Riddle passed some of his power to > Harry. We all agree. So is it inconceivable that Merope passed (and I > agree not her powers directly) *something* to Lily's mother? I'd have > to say no, it is not inconceivable. Magpie: It's not being inconceivable puts the burden of proof on other people to prove it didn't happen rather than finding any evidence that it *did* happen, which is what's needed for a theory to hold any water, imo. I could just as easily say, "Tom Riddle passed some of his power to Harry. So is it inconceivable that Luna Lovegood passed her powers to Morphin Gaunt?" The two things have nothing to do with each other. Luna passing something to Morphin probably seems less likely because I'm saying it sarcastically, but it's actually not any more or less against what we've seen. Ken: We have canon proof that some > kinds of magical power can be passed between wizards. Perhaps only > Slytherin's heirs can do this, speculation on my part. The notion that > Merope might have passed *something magical* to Lily's mother is a > simple (but speculative, I agree) extension of that "known fact". Magpie: Lily's mother is canonically a Muggle--one who probably was also not born at the time of Merope Riddle's death. It's an extension of a known fact that's so tenuous I don't see how it has any meaning. The one bit that's canon is the passing of a magical power. Mrs. Evans and Merope having any contact, Muggles being gifted magic by Wizards, Tom's passing Harry power being related to his being Slytherin's Heir (as opposed to the strange occurrance at Godric's Hollow) is all invented and isn't tied to the story so far at all that I can see. I still can't prove it didn't happen, no. But that's what makes it a different kind of theory than, say, RAB being Regulus. Talking about the RAB theory gets us right into canon, answers questions already asked and leads to discussions about central themes. This theory just kind of hangs out there as an extra complication weakening some of the things we already know. Ken: Do > we have any evidence that these two people were ever in close > proximity. NO! The only thing we can say about that is that Merope was > in London and London is one place in England that many residents of > England will visit during their lifetimes. It is plausible that they > could have been near each other at some point. Magpie: But is the fact that they both lived in the same country, possibly not even at the same time, really enough reason to consider this possibility if we are really looking at whether something might happen? It seems more like a way keep this outside narrative attached to the canonical one than an extension of the canon narrative or a prediction of where the narrative is going. > > Magpie: > > > > The trouble with this and other backwards theories is that there is > > no literary reason in canon to begin considering the idea--even if > > it turned out to be true a good case wasn't made for it. > > Ken: > > But we've given you some. They are the barest traces of clues but they > really are in canon. They might not be clues to anything as it turns > out. They are some things that one of us noticed that look interesting. Magpie: It seems like the only reason I honestly recall being given is that I can't say it didn't happen and that the theory features some characters from canon, and some ideas that resemble some other ideas in canon. > > Magpie: > > And if the turning of Muggle to Wizard via the "gifting" of one's > > status to another were included in canon we'd have some reason to > > consider at least something like this. JKR always introduces a > > magical concept before it becomes important. My problem isn't that I > > can't explain this transfer through magical theory, since magical > > theory isn't a real field of study, it's that it's not ever in > > canon. In fact, it rather destroys one of the main points of canon, > > the Muggle/Wizard separation. That's a major thing to introduce into > > your magical system. > > > > Ken: > > We have seen the magical gifting from Tom to Harry so it is in canon. > The separation between Muggle and Wizard is not absolute, Lily and > Hermione are both proof of that. So there is nothing to destroy on > that front. If this notion turns out to be true it is both in canon > and introduced before it was important. So, what's your real complaint > here? Magpie: The separation between Muggle and Wizard is absolute on the individual leavel--if a Muggle can become a Wizard, that's a big deal given the lines drawn in this universe that I can see. Rowling herself refers to magic as genetic. That is the basic law that this theory is violating, one that we've been given no reason whatsoever to break except for the fact that if we don't break it the theory doesn't work. My complaint about this kind of thing when I have one is not that I don't think people should do it if they enjoy doing it. But it is understandably frustrating when one person is trying to talk about what's reasonably there in canon and it feels like the other person's goal is to keep the theory afloat. That's when it begins to feel like hijacking a discussion about HP canon to talk about a fanfic someone would like to write. There's nothing wrong with this as an idea, but it's weird when it leads to talking about Muggles becoming Wizards and a character long-dead having important interaction with a character never even introduced it doesn't seem to say much about canon. > > Magpie: > > > > Sure the theory being given here will either turn out to have > > happened or not in DH. The same could be said for a theory that > > Harry and Hermione are really the same person, that Snape is really > > a woman, that Harry and Ron are really twins separated at birth and > > born in Wisconsin. > > Ken: > > I think this notion is a *little* more tightly linked to canon than > those! ;-) Magpie: I wouldn't be so sure these kinds of theories couldn't be argued the same way if someone really liked them, actually! We don't know these things won't be true, so they could happen. We've seen a woman who was really a man, why not a man who was really a woman? Molly treats Harry like a son--maybe he really is her son. Perhaps this is why Harry/Hermione shippers were so off. (We've gotten Ron=Dumbledore!) > > Magpie: > > It does > > frustrate me when people think that stuff they made up is canon, or > > that being able to make a theory fit canon is the same as proving it > > to be true. I'm not at all unhappy at people doing this kind of > > speculating; I think the only time it causes any problems is when it > > claims to be something else. > > Ken: > > Am I making stuff up and calling it canon? Maybe others were, if you > think I was I can assure you it is only because I can't remember canon > with the laser-like accuracy that some of you can. There is no > "proving" these theories in the scientific sense. All I am saying is > that some scientific methods can be used to generate ideas. When you > are brainstorming ideas you are lucky to get one in a hundred that is > worth anything. If you don't brainstorm you won't get that one. I > agree that the ideas do have to find support in canon and I think this > one can claim *some*. I don't expect it to be confirmed in DH, but it > could be and if it were I think Rowling has laid the groundwork for > our acceptance of it. Magpie: It may be relevent here that as you're coming at this from a scientific method due to what you do in real life, professionally I'm a writer and an editor, so I'm probably more used to analyzing this kind of stuff, predicting, and groundwork and all of that quickly. Obviously that doesn't make my opinion more valid or anything, I just think it really may make the way we look at stories really different. It's hard for me to not look at the canon as seriously limiting possibilities (even while I have mostly no idea what will happen). -m From va32h at comcast.net Wed Feb 14 22:06:53 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:06:53 -0000 Subject: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702141329o4557eaf6k13bdb64c8e29a0a1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164969 > montims: > actually, it says: "None of them noticed a large tawny owl flutter past the > window"... I have had the thought that maybe the owl was bringing a letter > to Prof McGonagall, who - as a cat - was on the corner of the street when > Vernon left, reading a map. She wouldn't have needed a map to Privet Drive, > as she was already there. Was she tracking Hagrid's progress??? va32h here: My impression is that McGonagall had just arrived on Privet Drive. She consults the map and then reads the street sign. She is making sure she's in the right place. There are several wizards out and about on this day - Vernon notices them as groups of strangely dressed people on the streetcorners. This particular tawny owl may have been simply passing by the Dursely home on its way to deliver a note from one wizarding family to another. The local news reports that evening that the skies were full of owls. va32h From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 14 22:11:31 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:11:31 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164970 Ken wrote: > The words on the page say that Tom Riddle passed some of his power to Harry. We all agree. So is it inconceivable that Merope passed (and I agree not her powers directly) *something* to Lily's mother? I'd have to say no, it is not inconceivable. We have canon proof that some kinds of magical power can be passed between wizards. Perhaps only Slytherin's heirs can do this, speculation on my part. The notion that Merope might have passed *something magical* to Lily's mother is a simple (but speculative, I agree) extension of that "known fact". Do we have any evidence that these two people were ever in close proximity. NO! The only thing we can say about that is that Merope was in London and London is one place in England that many residents of England will visit during their lifetimes. It is plausible that they could have been near each other at some point. Carol responds: But the original poster was arguing that Merope deliberately passed her powers to Lily. Once she realized that Merope died some thirty-five years before Lily was born, she changed the speculation to passing the powers to Lily's mother. You seem to agree that Merope could not have passed her powers to Lily's mother because, as we know from canon and interviews, Lily's mother was a Muggle. Had her mother acquired powers from Merope, assuming that a Muggle can acquire powers, she would have ceased to be a Muggle and become a witch. So, however Lily may have acquired her powers (a genetic mutation?), it was not through inheritance of her mother's powers. You mentioned genetics (hair color). A gene for black hair is dominant, so if Tom Riddle Sr. or James Potter passed on a gene for black hair to his son (or hypothetical daughter), that son would have black hair regardless of the mother's hair color (red, in Lily's case; brown, IIRC, in Merope's). (I'm vastly oversimplifying, but my point is that the black hair, the chief physical characteristic that Teen!Tom and Harry have in common, comes from their fathers in both cases.) So the tiny physical resemblance is no indication that they're related on the mother's side. And besides, Tom Riddle is the last heir of Salazar Slytherin (through his mother), and being related through the Muggle Tom Sr. would be irrelevant. Physical resemblance is no evidence of acquired powers, in any case. Lily's mother acquires powers from Merope Gaunt Riddle, who has brown hair, and Harry's black hair is somehow evidence of that connection? The powers that Harry acquired from Voldemort were acquired under very special circumstances involving sacrificial love magic which caused an AK to be deflected onto a wizard who could not be killed because his soul was anchored to earth by Horcruxes. Merope Gaunt, who may have lost her powers or simply stopped using them, died in childbirth. Her own child was born with powers exponentially greater than hers, as if Salazar Slytherin's own powers (other than Parseltongue) had skipped fifty generations and accumulated in him. So if her powers went anywhere, they must have gone into him, which would make much more sense than giving them away to some unknown Muggle. If JKR wanted us to suspect that Merope had given away her powers to a Muggle girl (and Lily's mother must have been very young at the time), the girl would have been mentioned. Instead, the only girl mentioned is the future Mrs. Cole, a Muggle girl a little younger than Merope, who was eighteen by DD's account when she married and might have been nineteen when Tom was born. But the one girl we know to have been present for the birth remained a Muggle and has no connection with Lily. Carol, who can see no point in this particular bit of speculation even if it could hold up to canonical scrutiny From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Feb 14 22:26:54 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:26:54 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164971 > Alla: > > Well, I would hope that Minerva is the kind of character who does > think that **that sort of thing** as you call it or **self-defense > from unforgivable curse** as I call it, is Okay indeed. Otherwise I > would be very dissapointed, personally :) > Pippin: Around here, a child who even brings a knife to school, much less uses it, is supposed to be expelled -- no exceptions. (Fortunately, as at Hogwarts, the administration has the option of looking the other way, so my son was not punished when he brought the silver pocket knife which was his grandfather's birthday gift to class -- he didn't even think of it as a weapon! ::rolls eyes::) But I absolutely agree with Minerva -- Harry was lucky to get off with a detention. And actually if Draco had been caught using an unforgivable, things might have been better in the long run. If Draco had been taken into custody, the cabinet plan might have been thwarted. I am not questioning Harry's right to defend himself, but he still chose to supply himself with an illegal weapon. In the event Harry is punished for telling an outrageous lie. I think that is a situation more teens can identify with anyway. Pippin From valentina.moretti at alice.it Wed Feb 14 20:45:11 2007 From: valentina.moretti at alice.it (Valentina) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:45:11 +0100 Subject: R.A.B. In-Reply-To: References: <008f01c74e43$411aa8b0$4580400c@Spot> Message-ID: <001501c75079$0612d1b0$0201a8c0@PC475714713263> No: HPFGUIDX 164972 Va32h : >> When JKR wants to give us a real "clue", it's obvious - like Aberforth being Dumbledore's brother, or Ron & Hermione (delusional H/Hr shippers aside) or heaven help us - R.A.B. << I am new to the list and maybe you have already spoken and theorized a lot about this but what do you think is R.A.B. ? I am soo curious! Many thanks Valentina From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 14 20:41:11 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:41:11 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Portraits In-Reply-To: References: <001b01c75035$21047ee0$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: <001401c75078$7cdd6450$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 164973 --Carol wrote-- >>> Whatever animates the portraits is an "imprint" of a soul, not the > soul itself or a part of the soul. And I still say that Snape's use of > the same word, "imprint," in relation to ghosts ("the imprint of a > departed soul") is more than coincidence. I just wish her intended > meaning were clearer! <<< --Ronin's Comments-- This is exactly why I wonder about the other photos and chocolate frog cards. Something must be added that is of the original. Whatever it is must be safely removable from the living as well. I wonder if these images are sort of like a 3D video with a bit of artificial intelligence. Kind of like a video game character based on the original. Or, at least, the magical equivalent of that sort of thing. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From pswann at kc.rr.com Wed Feb 14 21:30:42 2007 From: pswann at kc.rr.com (Swann, Patricia) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:30:42 -0600 Subject: Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Liv Message-ID: <00C05AEDD0982640A4F8A246E68D97F201A03AFC@kcexch1.mri-kc.int> No: HPFGUIDX 164974 What if Lily and Petunia weren't blood sisters? Patricia From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Wed Feb 14 22:53:25 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:53:25 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Liv In-Reply-To: <00C05AEDD0982640A4F8A246E68D97F201A03AFC@kcexch1.mri-kc.int> References: <00C05AEDD0982640A4F8A246E68D97F201A03AFC@kcexch1.mri-kc.int> Message-ID: <948bbb470702141453s14becb37x980eae118465a8f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164976 What if Lily and Petunia weren't blood sisters? Patricia ============================= Jeremiah: Then Harry would not have any protection at the Dursleys. There wouldn't be a place where his mother's blood dwells and that would make Harry susceptible to attack. Not a very good strategy on DD's part if he never figured out that Petunia and Lily weren't sisters. But I have a feeling they are blood sisters. The whole story would fall apart and LV would have killed Harry by now. Also, If Petunia isn't Lily's blood sister then why would she have taken Harry in to begin with? Jeremiah: who can't remember if this post will have him reach his daily limit but is going to post it anyway and hope the List Elves will forgive him for his ignorance and incapability to count. ;) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Feb 14 23:30:39 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 23:30:39 -0000 Subject: R.A.B. In-Reply-To: <001501c75079$0612d1b0$0201a8c0@PC475714713263> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164977 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Valentina" wrote: > > > Va32h : > >> When JKR wants to give us a real "clue", it's obvious - > like Aberforth being Dumbledore's brother, or Ron & Hermione > (delusional H/Hr shippers aside) or heaven help us - R.A.B. << > > > I am new to the list and maybe you have already spoken and > theorized a lot about this but what do you think is R.A.B. ? > > I am soo curious! > > Many thanks > > Valentina > Geoff: This has indeed been discussed and analysed ad infinitum. When the list was reopened after the publication of HBP at 1:00 pm on 19/07/05 (having been closed over the weekend), message 132914 was posted at 1:13 pm by vmonte suggesting that RAB was Regulus Black. This was the first tiny stone at the start of a massive avalanche of speculation. I might suggest that, if you start from that message and work forwards through the myriad of threads, you will find much food for thought on this particular subject... Have fun. :-) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 00:43:27 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 00:43:27 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164978 > > Alla: > > > > Well, I would hope that Minerva is the kind of character who does > > think that **that sort of thing** as you call it or **self- defense > > from unforgivable curse** as I call it, is Okay indeed. Otherwise > I > > would be very dissapointed, personally :) > > > Magpie: > I'm saying that I think Minerva, as a teacher, would make a > distinction between the general question of Unforgivables being > something to defend yourself from and students opening each other up > in bathroom brawls. I can imagine her acknowledging that Harry was > acting in self defense but have a harder time imagining her going > from that to, "Nothing else you could have done, Harry. It's great > you did that." I think she'd want to deal with things beyond making > sure there was self-defense involved. Alla: Oh, but why such leap between first and second sentence of that imaginary quote? Because I do not get why if Minerva would acknowledge that self defense is involved, she would leap from nothing else you could have done to it is great you did that, you know? To me the self defense implies that nothing else can be done, period. Which does not make Draco bleeding Okay, but neither would it be Harry's responsibility IMO. Except thinking about the wrong curse, IMO. I just do not see why Minerva would want to deal with it, you know? If Harry's conscience feels it needs to be dealt with, fine, but it is not something authority should be involved with IMO. >> > Alla: > > > > Not sure I understand, you are saying that Snape does not punish > him > > for that? How so? Without Harry doing sectusemptra Snape would > have > > no reason to give him detentions at all, book or no book IMO of > > course. > > Magpie: > And you think Snape shares your view of when he's got reason to give > Harry detention? I don't. But regardless, even if Sectumsempra was > the event that led to the detentions it is not what the detentions > are *about,* which is important. Neither Harry nor Snape associates > the detentions with Draco's injury, not even at the moment the > detentions are given. The detention as a punishment for hurting > Draco is intentionally not given by Snape, Harry or the narrator, > any more than is the idea that Harry's in detention for messing up > the bathroom. Alla: Awww, I think I get it or maybe not. It is just to me that even though Snape does not say precisely that he punished Harry for Sectusemptra by implying that he punishes Harry for using the book he does precisely that. He IMO lets Harry knows that he knows what is in the book, if that makes any sense. > Magpie: > I mean the OP was about how it wasn't fair that Harry hurt Malfoy in > self-defense and no one ever found out the facts, as if Harry was > suffering from being falsely accused of hurting Malfoy offensively. > But Harry's acting in self-defense ins't a secret and his suffering > has nothing to do with the false idea that he wasn't acting in self- > defense. Alla: Forgive me, but I may bug you offlist about this paragraph, because I am still confused. I mean what are you saying? I think it is pretty much a given , yes, that Harry is acting in self defense, but the reason why I bring it up is because it seems to be questioned, no? > > Alla: > > >> > As I said, I think Harry was stupid for thinking about > Sectusemptra, > > Draco was something else IMO and I absolutely resist the argument > > that their responsibilities in this scene are even **close** to > one > > another. > > Magpie: > They don't have to be close to one another. Harry certainly isn't > comparing them. He doesn't *have to* feel anything--nobody does. > Like I said, he's free to take Ginny's attitude that it was good he > had something up his sleeve. Harry isn't able to make that leap, > completely. He feels twinges of conscience. Some people think it's > right for him to feel that, some people think it's wussy, some thing > it's a sign that Harry's an extraordinary person. Alla: Exactly. They do not have to be close to one another, the reason why I am saying that they are not in my opinion is because the general impression I get from your argument is that Draco and Harry **are** equally responsible for what happened. Forgive if I am wrong, but that is how I always feel when we start debating this scene and didn't you just say upthread that both boys did not get the talk about Dark magic and they are **both** lucky? Or did I misunderstand you? And that I very strongly disagree with. I believe that Draco is so much **luckier** to not get questioned about Unforgivable than Harry who used the unknown curse in IMO what is 100% self defense. > Alla: > > Imagine if Harry used I don't know, stupefy and Draco hit his head > on > > the bathroom floor and died. Would you begrudge Harry for using > that > > curse as well? > > Magpie: > I wonder why you would make that comparison, actually. In this > scenario Harry is using a non-hurtful spell that due to bizarre > circumstances led to a death, as opposed to an offensive spell he > only knew was to be used again enemies that was, unsurprisingly, > potentially deadly in itself. I would certainly feel differently > about Harry's using stupefy and I would guess Harry would also (even > if he regretted being involved in anyone else's death, even > tangentially). Obviously there's never any question that it was > wrong of Harry to do *something* in the scene. That's part of what I > think is carefully put into the scene. It would be such a different > scene if Harry had done what he does in this scenario. But he > didn't. Alla: I made that comparison to show my view that the **only** reason Harry should feel twinges of conscience is because he was thinking about unknown curse before hand. I was trying to say that in any self defense scenario, anything can go wrong and self defense scenario does not become less self defense IMO. ? > > Magpie: > I think there is an element of intent to Harry's use of Sectumsempra > that is part of that niggling conscience. Alla: Oh, I think we finally got to the heart of our disagreement. You think that Harry used Sectusemptra intentionally, so IMO it means that you do not buy that it was clear self defense? I guess that is agree to disagree time then. I think that it is very clear that Harry used Sectusemptra completely as self-defense reflex, because he does **not** use it right away in response to Malfoy's crucio, he uses it only when he is IMO not in control and rather desperate. Sure, it is his stupidity that got this curse in his head in the first place, but I do not buy that he did it on purpose at all. Pippin: I am not questioning Harry's right to defend himself, > but he still chose to supply himself with an illegal weapon. Alla: I disagree. I think he chose to supply himself with unknown weapon, which is also bad, but not illegal, or at least he did not know that it was. JMO, Alla. From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu Feb 15 00:55:04 2007 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:55:04 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164979 In a message dated 2/14/2007 7:45:25 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: To me the self defense implies that nothing else can be done, period. ----------------- Actually, it means the perp couldn't (or didn't try to) think of anything else that COULD be done. A Shield Charm? Step behind a physical barrier? Conjure a mirror? Expelliarmus? Stupefy? Petrificus? Harry had alternatives - he made the worst possible choice. ("Yo, C.O. - he threw a spitball at me, so I shanked him! It was self-defense!") Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 00:59:27 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 00:59:27 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164980 Alla: > To me the self defense implies that nothing else can be done, > period. > Sherrie: > ----------------- > Actually, it means the perp couldn't (or didn't try to) think of anything > else that COULD be done. A Shield Charm? Step behind a physical barrier? > Conjure a mirror? Expelliarmus? Stupefy? Petrificus? > > Harry had alternatives - he made the worst possible choice. ("Yo, C.O. - he > threw a spitball at me, so I shanked him! It was self-defense!") Alla: Actually he was slipping on the floor when he finally used Sectusemptra, so I see it as a last desperate attempt to defend himself. So I am really not sure how many alternatives he had at that point. Step behind a physical barrier? Malfoy could have hit him while he was trying to get up first. Sectusemptra is not the best choice, sure, but I see nothing strange that when he is down, he would use the curse that he remembers marked for enemies. Oh, and I would think that spitball is not quite in the same league as Unforgivable. IMO of course. Alla, counts to five and dissappears for today. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 01:14:10 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 01:14:10 -0000 Subject: Portraits - Additional: Actors Playing a Role In-Reply-To: <20030803131749.58950.qmail@web20705.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164981 --- Scott Santangelo wrote: > > > > Donna wrote: > >"Steve" wrote: > > Portraits are actors in two senses; they are playing > > the role of the person in the portrait and the are > > playing the role OF a portrait... > Donna : > I ...suspect that since they are actors portraying a > role, they do to some extent reflect the world's > perceived belief in who they are. ... I think that > would be more hinted at, his real personality would > dominate. > --------------- > owlery2003: > > Interesting theory, but I tend to think the "real > person" is somehow represented (and not by an "actor"). > In DD's office, we see the former headmasters, and I > can't imagine they are anyone other than the "real" > thing. ... > > owlery2003 bboyminn: Owlery2003, you are taking my 'actor' analogy too literally. I don't think for one second they hire an actor, throw him into the painting, and let him spend his life pretending to be someone else. No, the 'actor' metaphor simply illustrates how a portrait can portray a character with great depth, but still not be as fully realized as the represented person. The point is that the Portrait is NOT the real person but a /representation/ of the real person. A representation that has deep and intimate knowledge to draw on via the bit of the living person that has been placed in the painting. But, there is a limit to the portraits ability to draw from the bank of knowledge of the orignal person, just as an actor has a limited bank of knowledge to draw on to represent the character they play. This is a metaphor to explain the very strong persence of character and personality, but at the same time explain the lack of true depth and meaning. The actor can not really reach beyond the script he is given to play. The portrait can not reach beyond the limited information it has to use as a means of representing the subject of the portrait. The real portrait can play the role of the real person personality and all, and do so very convincingly. It is only when you search for depth and meaning that you discover that the depth and meaning aren't really there. It is all show and no go. Like any real-world portrait, a magical portrait is not the real person, it is a representation of the real person. Magical portraits are simply animated, interacting, personality portraying representation of the real person who is the subject of the protrait. So, again, the whole point of using the 'actors' analogy was to address the limited depth we find in portraits. Their job is not to be the person, but to represent the person to the best of their limited ability. just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu Feb 15 01:36:30 2007 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:36:30 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164982 In a message dated 2/14/2007 8:01:54 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: Oh, and I would think that spitball is not quite in the same league as Unforgivable. ----------------------- Actually, comparatively speaking in the two scenarios, they're on about the same level. An inmate dissing another inmate is, in their world, Unforgiveable. Still - even if he were off-balance, as you state, Harry had other options, short of that figurative shank. "Stupefy" should have come more easily to his lips than a spell he'd only just read - and it's easier to say quickly. As for McGonagall NOT getting involved, had she been the teacher who arrived on the scene - I hope she'd have been at least as harsh on Harry as Snape was. Draco caused Harry no physical damage - indeed, short of Legilimency or a Penseive, there's no proof that Draco did anything at all, beyond Harry's word. Yet there he is, bleeding to death from wounds that are obviously not self-inflicted, with Harry the only possible suspect. At the very least, that's unauthorized dueling - and a case COULD be made for attempted murder. After all, an Auror would only have Harry's word that he didn't know what the spell did - and IIRC, Harry wasn't in the best of odor with the Minister at that point. A few detentions for bald-faced lying and cheek? Harry should be grateful that's ALL he got. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 15 01:49:23 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:49:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To the Extreme References: Message-ID: <007601c750a3$86e78680$5f8c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164983 > Magpie: >> I'm saying that I think Minerva, as a teacher, would make a >> distinction between the general question of Unforgivables being >> something to defend yourself from and students opening each other > up >> in bathroom brawls. I can imagine her acknowledging that Harry was >> acting in self defense but have a harder time imagining her going >> from that to, "Nothing else you could have done, Harry. It's great >> you did that." I think she'd want to deal with things beyond > making >> sure there was self-defense involved. > > Alla: > > Oh, but why such leap between first and second sentence of that > imaginary quote? > > Because I do not get why if Minerva would acknowledge that self > defense is involved, she would leap from nothing else you could have > done to it is great you did that, you know? Magpie: But of course there's choices of things that could be done, particularly in this case. It's not like Sectumsempra is the only thing that would have worked--it's not even one Harry's used before at this point. I can't imagine McGonagall wouldn't see exactly that distinction. Just as I would expect her to make that distinction if, for instance, the Slytherins were getting hexed on the train and from the floor managed fire off AKs at everyone. Alla:> > To me the self defense implies that nothing else can be done, > period. Which does not make Draco bleeding Okay, but neither would > it be Harry's responsibility IMO. Except thinking about the wrong > curse, IMO. Magpie: Draco's bleeding because Harry pointed his wand, waved it wildly, and threw a cutting curse. If it's there was nothing else to be done, it would probably be more okay. Alla: > If Harry's conscience feels it needs to be dealt with, fine, but it > is not something authority should be involved with IMO. Magpie: I don't think there's any question of authority dealing with Harry's conscience. As I said, nobody is sitting Harry down and talking to him about this aspect at all. Not even Snape, who might rant about Sirius almost killing him but doesn't seem too horrified about Draco's near-death. >> Magpie: >> And you think Snape shares your view of when he's got reason to > give >> Harry detention? I don't. But regardless, even if Sectumsempra was >> the event that led to the detentions it is not what the detentions >> are *about,* which is important. Neither Harry nor Snape > associates >> the detentions with Draco's injury, not even at the moment the >> detentions are given. The detention as a punishment for hurting >> Draco is intentionally not given by Snape, Harry or the narrator, >> any more than is the idea that Harry's in detention for messing up >> the bathroom. > > Alla: > > Awww, I think I get it or maybe not. It is just to me that even > though Snape does not say precisely that he punished Harry for > Sectusemptra by implying that he punishes Harry for using the book > he does precisely that. He IMO lets Harry knows that he knows what > is in the book, if that makes any sense. Magpie: Sure--but Snape's not spending a moment's time on Harry's hurting anybody. >> Magpie: >> I mean the OP was about how it wasn't fair that Harry hurt Malfoy > in >> self-defense and no one ever found out the facts, as if Harry was >> suffering from being falsely accused of hurting Malfoy > offensively. >> But Harry's acting in self-defense ins't a secret and his > suffering >> has nothing to do with the false idea that he wasn't acting in > self- >> defense. > > Alla: > > Forgive me, but I may bug you offlist about this paragraph, because > I am still confused. I mean what are you saying? I think it is > pretty much a given , yes, that Harry is acting in self defense, but > the reason why I bring it up is because it seems to be questioned, > no? Magpie: Not at all. Harry's acting in self-defense is canon. It's never called into question either way; Harry's never accused of cursing Malfoy offensively. The issue isn't that Harry wasn't on the floor with Draco above him possibly about to Crucio him. We know that's what happened. >> Magpie: >> They don't have to be close to one another. Harry certainly isn't >> comparing them. He doesn't *have to* feel anything--nobody does. >> Like I said, he's free to take Ginny's attitude that it was good > he >> had something up his sleeve. Harry isn't able to make that leap, >> completely. He feels twinges of conscience. Some people think it's >> right for him to feel that, some people think it's wussy, some > thing >> it's a sign that Harry's an extraordinary person. > > Alla: > > Exactly. They do not have to be close to one another, the reason why > I am saying that they are not in my opinion is because the general > impression I get from your argument is that Draco and Harry **are** > equally responsible for what happened. Forgive if I am wrong, but > that is how I always feel when we start debating this scene and > didn't you just say upthread that both boys did not get the talk > about Dark magic and they are **both** lucky? Or did I misunderstand > you? Magpie: They are both lucky and they do both have responsibility for their own actions. It's not like a scale where if Harry has responsibility for something it takes away from Draco having responsibility for what he did. They're both living their completely separate stories. Alla:> > And that I very strongly disagree with. I believe that Draco is so > much **luckier** to not get questioned about Unforgivable than Harry > who used the unknown curse in IMO what is 100% self defense. Magpie: Well, he's not lucky in general in the scene, since he's the one who gets badly hurt, which why I think he is punished for using his curse. In terms of who's luckier to not get questioned about the Unforgivable, I don't see how that really matters. Draco was in the midst of trying to throw one that might or might not have worked. Thinking about what actually happens in canon, I'm not seeing what big difference this would have made to the way things went. Who is definitely ignorant of this fact and what would happen if they knew it? Nobody in canon, including Harry, seems to focus on that idea, and I can't imagine it wouldn't if it was the case. >> Magpie: >> I wonder why you would make that comparison, actually. In this >> scenario Harry is using a non-hurtful spell that due to bizarre >> circumstances led to a death, as opposed to an offensive spell he >> only knew was to be used again enemies that was, unsurprisingly, >> potentially deadly in itself. I would certainly feel differently >> about Harry's using stupefy and I would guess Harry would also > (even >> if he regretted being involved in anyone else's death, even >> tangentially). Obviously there's never any question that it was >> wrong of Harry to do *something* in the scene. That's part of what > I >> think is carefully put into the scene. It would be such a > different >> scene if Harry had done what he does in this scenario. But he >> didn't. > > Alla: > > I made that comparison to show my view that the **only** reason > Harry should feel twinges of conscience is because he was thinking > about unknown curse before hand. I was trying to say that in any > self defense scenario, anything can go wrong and self defense > scenario does not become less self defense IMO. Magpie: Right, you created a scenario where Harry was careful and responsible and didn't cross the line into something more severe, a curse where he didn't know what exactly it did but knew it was "for enemies," indicating it's aggressive and punishing (which is why he was hoping to try it out on the irritating McLaggen as he's tried out other aggressive hexes). Nothing "went wrong" in the spell--it went all too right. >> Magpie: >> I think there is an element of intent to Harry's use of > Sectumsempra >> that is part of that niggling conscience. > > Alla: > > Oh, I think we finally got to the heart of our disagreement. You > think that Harry used Sectusemptra intentionally, so IMO it means > that you do not buy that it was clear self defense? > > I guess that is agree to disagree time then. I think that it is very > clear that Harry used Sectusemptra completely as self-defense > reflex, because he does **not** use it right away in response to > Malfoy's crucio, he uses it only when he is IMO not in control and > rather desperate. Sure, it is his stupidity that got this curse in > his head in the first place, but I do not buy that he did it on > purpose at all. Magpie: Harry uses a curse marked "for enemies" not "self-defense." He's been thinking about it for weeks, hoping to try it out on McLaggen who also annoys him and who he wants to *punish.* It never crosses Harry's mind that this is a self-defense spell. He always relates to it as a curse. Beyond that, there is also the intention required to cast any spell. I think the reason he feels twinges of conscience is that he *can't* be so sure that he was only thinking self-defense, particularly given the history involved. It's not like he accidentally fired this off on Hermione. This was someone he hates and infuriates him. You hate somebody for that long and you wind up gutting him in the middle of a violent fight, you might not be so sure you couldn't possibly have wanted to hurt him. -m From puduhepa98 at aol.com Thu Feb 15 02:24:29 2007 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:24:29 EST Subject: The intellect of Krum Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164985 Posted by: "Bart Lidofsky" _bartl at sprynet.com _ (mailto:bartl at sprynet.com?Subject= Re:%20The%20intellect%20of%20Krum) _bml07646 _ (http://profiles.yahoo.com/bml07646) Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:26 am (PST) Geoff Bannister wrote: Geoff: > Being from the UK helps. Many years ago, there was a very funny actress > who appeared regularly on the radio called Hermione Gingold and was a > leading character in the film "Gigi". >Yes, she's the actress I was mentioning earlier. >Bart Nikkalmati Oh yes, I have hear of her, but I had totally forgotten the name and never made the association with our Hermione. BTW in my reading I came across an historical association with the name that no one may have heard of. The Hermione was a famous 32-gun Royal Navy frigate that was the subject of a mutiny in September 1797. She was taken over and most of the officers were killed. The ship was turned over to the Spanish in Venezuela. Some of the crew were eventually caught and hanged. The ship was renamed the Santa Cecilia, but in a daring and dramatic rescue, she was retaken from Havana harbor by a group of British sailors. She was renamed the Retribution. Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu Feb 15 02:31:57 2007 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:31:57 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164986 In a message dated 2/14/2007 8:56:15 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: Yes, the case could have been made for attempted murder, you are right, but only in the same manner as the case against Sirius Black was made for the murder of twelve muggles and betrayal of Potters. ---------------------------------- Not quite - Sirius WASN'T guilty of anything in that case. He went with the INTENT to hurt, possibly to kill, Pettigrew, but he never actually DID anything. Harry DID something that might have cost another student his life. Major difference there. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Feb 15 02:36:23 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:36:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702141215t4d82ec85r71b4a5d6067be6e6@mail.gmail.com> References: <948bbb470702141116h32690d41sdeb3390628aeaf8b@mail.gmail.com> <8ee758b40702141215t4d82ec85r71b4a5d6067be6e6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45D3C727.2020202@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164987 Janette wrote: montims: > actually, it says: "None of them noticed a large tawny owl flutter past the > window"... I have had the thought that maybe the owl was bringing a letter > to Prof McGonagall, who - as a cat - was on the corner of the street when > Vernon left, reading a map. She wouldn't have needed a map to Privet Drive, > as she was already there. Was she tracking Hagrid's progress??? Bart: Or perhaps scouting out Mrs. Figg's house? Maybe that's why she never married... Bart, noting that this IS Harry Potter for Grownups... From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu Feb 15 02:41:34 2007 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:41:34 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164988 In a message dated 2/14/2007 8:56:15 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: So you are saying that Mcgonagall should have been as harsh as Snape on Harry for something which would not have been correct? --------------------------- Would not have been correct to punish him for breaking school rules against unauthorized dueling? For seriously injuring another student - never mind who? For (at the very least) causing wanton destruction and mayhem to the school itself? Sorry - and no offense - but I think she'd be MORE than correct to punish him for any or all of the above infractions. (For the record, BTW, I'm not a particular fan of young Master Malfoy - I think he's a spoiled young prince who should have had his britches warmed where they're tightest YEARS ago. Wouldn't matter WHO was on the other end of the wand - Harry would still deserve the punishment.) Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 02:47:49 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 02:47:49 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164989 Alla: > So you are saying that Mcgonagall should have been as harsh as Snape > on Harry for something which would not have been correct? Sherrie: > --------------------------- > Would not have been correct to punish him for breaking school rules against > unauthorized dueling? For seriously injuring another student - never mind > who? For (at the very least) causing wanton destruction and mayhem to the > school itself? Sorry - and no offense - but I think she'd be MORE than correct > to punish him for any or all of the above infractions. Alla: I am sorry and no offense to you as well, but you keep calling it unathorised dueling. I call it self defense and I do not remember where in canon it says that student is forbidden to defend himself from Unforgivable curse. Should Harry have just taken the Crucio and maybe become insane? And yes, I believe that no matter who it would have been, no punishment should have been followed **at all**. I also believe that it would not have been attempted murder even if Draco would have bleed to death. Harry knows what it is to be tortured by Crucio. I think that he fully expected to relive minigraveyard, or something like that. Alla: > Yes, the case could have been made for attempted murder, you are > right, but only in the same manner as the case against Sirius Black > was made for the murder of twelve muggles and betrayal of Potters. > Sherry: > ---------------------------------- > Not quite - Sirius WASN'T guilty of anything in that case. He went with the > INTENT to hurt, possibly to kill, Pettigrew, but he never actually DID > anything. > > Harry DID something that might have cost another student his life. Major > difference there. Alla: I do not see the major difference, only small one. If Harry did not do anything, he would have run a chance of becoming insane of consequences of Crucio. And in your imaginary scenario instead of being acknowledged as self defense, he would have been **framed** for attempted murder. I wonder, do you think Malfoy should have been send to Azkaban for attempted murder when he scared Harry as dementor with his goons? After all he knew how badly Harry reacted on the train, so I think he had enough brains to figure out that Harry had a high chance to fall down from his broom and maybe die? JMO, Alla. Alla, goes to slam her fingers and hard. From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Feb 15 03:07:22 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:07:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: R.A.B. In-Reply-To: <001501c75079$0612d1b0$0201a8c0@PC475714713263> References: <008f01c74e43$411aa8b0$4580400c@Spot> <001501c75079$0612d1b0$0201a8c0@PC475714713263> Message-ID: <45D3CE6A.6090606@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164990 Valentina wrote: > I am new to the list and maybe you have already spoken and > theorized a lot about this but what do you think is R.A.B. ? Bart: There is general agreement that it is Reggie Black, although one of the major clues would count as "cheating"; in languages where Reggie's name is different, the initials are different, too, but still match his name. Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Feb 15 03:08:24 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:08:24 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Liv In-Reply-To: <00C05AEDD0982640A4F8A246E68D97F201A03AFC@kcexch1.mri-kc.int> References: <00C05AEDD0982640A4F8A246E68D97F201A03AFC@kcexch1.mri-kc.int> Message-ID: <45D3CEA8.9090609@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164991 Swann, Patricia wrote: > What if Lily and Petunia weren't blood sisters? Bart: Then the blood protection of Harry staying at her house wouldn't work. Bart From elfundeb at gmail.com Thu Feb 15 03:23:41 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:23:41 -0500 Subject: Lupin/ Father Figures Message-ID: <80f25c3a0702141923p60b55ae4lb183fd098a0eb739@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164992 I decided to go back and reread the Lupin bits in the books before responding to all the Lupin comments from last week. It took a bit of time . . . . Carol: Considering that he "forgot" to take his potion, endangered three students by transforming in their presence on a full-moon night, failed to tell Dumbledore how Sirius Black could get into the castle even after Black had slashed up the Fat Lady's painting and terrified Ron with a twelve-inch knife, and nearly committed murder in front of those same three students, I'd say his judgment is fairly sound in terms of his unsuitability to teach. (Or we could blame it all on the DADA Curse. :-) ) Debbie: It's too bad he kept recklessly endangering his students because, unlike some others on the Hogwarts staff (::coughHagridcough::), he was a rather effective teacher. The DADA curse played a part in his dismissal, but it seems to work by exploiting each DADA professor's weaknesses, and Lupin's is a pervasive fear that his friends will desert him if he is discovered to have failed them in any respect. Carol: (And BTW, we know that DD placed an ad in the Daily Prophet after Lockhart was incapacitated; it's one of the things he mentions in the post-Basilisk interview with Harry. So probably that's how Lupin found out about the job, and DD, given both the Black situation and his policy of sheltering strays, not to mention that he actually knew something about Dark creatures, would have been happy to hire him.) Debbie: I appreciate your encyclopedic knowledge of canon; I had forgotten that DD had placed an ad. Yet since Lupin seems to view himself as all but unemployable, I'm not convinced he would respond to an ad. After Lockhart (who *is* the type to respond to an ad), I think DD had to recruit the DADA professors, and after GoF, he ran out of options. Carol: I don't think Lupin fails to be a father figure to Harry because it's too dangerous. Too weak or too passive I'll buy. He's very secretive and doesn't like self-exposure, and he never talks to Harry about the past except in general terms, excusing James's behavior and so on. Maybe he's afraid to get close to Harry because talking about the past would reveal his own weaknesses. Debbie: This is what I meant by dangerousness. It was dangerous to Lupin's own defense mechanisms. One of the interesting things I noticed in my rereading is that in PoA, on the day of the first Hogsmeade trip (which Harry had to miss), Lupin took the initiative to invite Harry into his office after hearing his voice in the corridor. It's only after Snape arrives with the wolfsbane potion and Harry (inartfully) tries to warn Lupin about him that Lupin dismisses him. It appears that Lupin realized at that point that he didn't want Harry to be asking pointed questions about prior relationships, which he wanted to avoid at all costs. In addition, while Lupin may fail at being a father figure, in PoA he demonstrates an ability and an interest in providing the kind of mentorship one might expect from a good teacher, giving hours of his free time to each Harry the Patronus, and giving good advice (doing a much better job than Snape in the Snape's Grudge chapter after Draco sees Harry's head in Hogsmeade). Ronin: Lupin was sort of fatherly in PoA, teaching Harry to get in touch with his feelings and use his inner strengths to overcome the desperation he felt when facing the dementors. He wasn't much of a father figure after PoA though, mainly because he was off watching after the werewolves and couldn't be around much. Harry seems to look up to Lupin and really care for and trust him. Lupin does try to help him with his grief and emotional issues, etc, but he's not a steady father figure. He's more like an uncle I'd say. Debbie: Yeah, another interesting thing I noticed from the re-read is how hard Lupin works to temper Sirius' hotheadedness, particularly in regard to Snape. After Sirius' confrontation with Snape after Christmas in OOP, it is Lupin who stresses to Harry how important it is for him to learn Occlumency; Sirius could not have pulled that off. Similarly, when they learn that Snape has discontinued the lessons and Sirius threatens to "have a word" with Snape, Lupin insists that he'll do it. Moderating the excesses of a father figure is almost as close to being a father figure as you can get without actually being one. Carol: (I don't think Lupin sees James in him as Snape and Black do, but he could be afraid of emotional attachment for fear of losing him. Or he could just realize that it's inappropriate for a teacher to become emotionally attached to a student and that the Boy Who Lived should be treated like any other student as far as possible, anti-Dementor lessons excepted.) Debbie: I think it's the former rather than the latter; becoming friendly with Harry might also provoke too many probing questions that he doesn't want to answer. His lycanthropy is something to be hidden at all costs, and by extension, his prior relationship with fugitive Sirius. We also know that he still has discomfort with emotional attachment even after there is no need to conceal what he knows about Sirius and the secret passages into Hogwarts, manifesting in his reluctance to pursue a relationship with Tonks. Carol: But it's also interesting that he takes the lead in blaming Snape and finding reasons to think that he's evil after Harry presents his incomplete version of the events on the tower. Debbie: Lupin accepted Dumbledore's word about Snape's loyalty because he trusted Dumbledore. Dumbledore was an extremely important mentor to Lupin. He made it possible for Lupin to attend Hogwarts. He welcomed Lupin into the Order of the Phoenix (band of misfits though it may be), giving him something to do in VWI when no one would employ him. He gave Lupin a job. Most importantly, he did not desert Lupin after learning the truth about the Marauders and everything he concealed while Sirius was being hunted as an escaped murderer. I attribute Lupin's about face to shock. Lupin and everyone else at Hogwarts were too much in shock to process anything except the one irrefutable fact Harry presented: Snape killed Dumbledore. And that fact confirmed every suspicion about Snape's repentance they'd had over the years. Carol: So will Lupin take some sort of action, preferably related to Peter Pettigrew rather than Snape, in DH? Or will he make matters worse again by doing the wrong thing (or nothing)? It's too late for Lupin to be a father figure to Harry, but he can still help the Order fight the DEs, and he'd be a useful contact for DDM!Snape if he'd just put two and two together. Debbie: Lupin now has little left to conceal. Even his love life has been dissected in public. So he no longer has a justification for doing nothing. However, I have trouble envisioning anything for him to do that will be useful to the plot ( i.e., that will be visible to the reader). I can't see him turning the other werewolves from LV's side; I think his value there consisted of gleaning information. Carol: It's too late for Lupin to be a father figure to Harry, but he can still help the Order fight the DEs, and he'd be a useful contact for DDM!Snape if he'd just put two and two together. Debbie: My take is that Snape has burned all his bridges and his challenge will be to prove his loyalty to Harry through his own actions, without any assistance from anyone. Annemehr made a similar suggestion: Lupin is the Order member who had been given some inkling of what was to happen that night. Judging by his reactions, I would guess he did not know that Dumbledore was to die; that seems to have truly shocked him. But he may have been forewarned that Snape was about to do something, at DD's behest, that would appear absolutely traitorous. [snip] It would give DDM!Snape a contact, and a particularly safe one with regard to fooling LV, because Lupin is running with the werewolves these days, and we know the werewolves and the DEs can be buddies. Debbie: Dumbledore keeps his own counsel to an even greater degree than Lupin. I am convinced that the plan was between him and Snape alone. And also that Dumbledore himself believed that there was a good chance he would not have to carry it out because he would die before it became necessary. In that case it would be better for no one to know of the plan. Pippin: Lupin was a member of the original Order of the Phoenix. That is hardly an example of a good person doing nothing. There are many other examples in canon where Lupin takes the initiative, especially in the Shrieking Shack and in his conversations in OOP. And of course he claimed to have led his friends to become animagi. I'm wary of explanations that are emotionally satisfying but are incompatible with the character's pattern of behavior, and Lupin's supposed passivity is one of them. Debbie: Lupin did nothing with his information about Sirius, even though he sincerely believed Sirius was guilty, because for him to become involved would risk exposing past actions that would reflect badly on him. He never expressed his reservations about the dangerousness of the Marauders' adventures because he was unwilling to give up the pleasure and companionship that those adventures represented. He sat idly by while James and Sirius bullied Snape (and who knows who else) because he would not risk his friendship in any way. Doing what is easy instead of what is right is weak, and when it consists of *not* doing anything, it is a passive response. Lupin is not passive in the sense that he never does anything. He can take action when it doesn't risk the loss of his few friends or his mentor. He's very willing to take initiative to defuse conflict, for example when he silences Molly in OOP when she starts in on Sirius. He's not a passive teacher, either; he probably thought that to fail at teaching would have confirmed in everyone's mind that werewolves are unemployable. Also, unlike Sirius, he doesn't like to rush into things without thinking them through. For example, in the Shrieking Shack he insists that Sirius not finish off Pettigrew until Harry hears a full explanation. I can imaging him having an internal debate with himself where he convinces himself I do think the notion that Lupin led his friends to become animagi is a bit of an overstatement. His lycanthropy provided the excuse, but his friends did everything else. Pippin: If Lupin has internalized the view of the WW that werewolves are inherently evil, and is attempting to counter it by appearing to be passive and harmless, that is not really a passive action. Debbie: I have trouble seeing where Lupin can be said to have internalized this view. He has internalized the WW's view that he is dangerous, but it's not the same thing as being evil. To be evil presupposes that you can choose good instead. Werewolves cannot choose to be something else. (However, they can choose to be evil, as Fenrir Greyback demonstrates.) Nor would I put the words passive and harmless in the same phrase. For a werewolf to be harmless requires a lot of vigilance. Forgetting one's potion may be passive, but it's not harmless. Pippin: But if he did indeed internalize that view, then he wouldn't need to "join the forces of evil." He would think he had joined them already. And that is the way Voldemort works. He doesn't bang on your door and invite you to join the forces of evil. He joins *you*. Debbie: I have been struggling to interpret this paragraph since I first read it. The only sense I can make of it is that Voldemort convinces you that you are inherently evil. But I don't see any evidence that Voldemort would make any headway with Lupin on that argument. Even with the Greybacks of the world, isn't he just promising to support their agenda? Voldemort's relationship with the werewolves smacks of a political alliance and nothing more. Debbie sure she's left something out that she meant to say [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu Feb 15 03:37:18 2007 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:37:18 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164993 In a message dated 2/14/2007 9:52:47 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: I am sorry and no offense to you as well, but you keep calling it unathorised dueling. I call it self defense and I do not remember where in canon it says that student is forbidden to defend himself from Unforgivable curse. ------------------------------------- Here's the thing, though - no one saw or heard Draco's attempt at an Unforgiveable - I don't think even Myrtle witnessed it (and can ghosts testify, anyway?). Based on what was observable to those who came on the scene, the conclusion to be drawn would amount to "unauthorized dueling" (which technically is what it was - one attacks, the other counters, regardless of the spells used). No, it wasn't a formal duel, with the bows and salutes and all that rot - but it was a duel nonetheless. Draco attacked, Harry countered - with deadly force, regardless of the existence of other, viable options. That's what would have been apparent to anyone coming on the scene, if they were kindly disposed toward Harry. Put yourself into the story - you are Professor X (or whatever letter you like). You are peacefully patrolling the corridors, thinking about a nightcap or the quiz you're giving the third years tomorrow, chasing snogging students out of crannies, when suddenly the most godawful racket erupts - it's coming from the second floor girls' loo. You race over there, and find Myrtle shrieking hysterically, the room a shambles, and Harry Potter standing over a bleeding body. Quickly - judging ONLY by what you see, what happened? As was pointed out, Draco's Crucio was never completed - so would not even register on his wand. Short of a full-fledged criminal investigation, with Veritaserum, Legilimency (wonder why all Aurors aren't trained in that - useful skill, I'd think, yeah?) and/or Penseive examination, there's no way to prove Harry's not lying about it to try to justify his own infraction. WE know he isn't, but we have the outside omniscience of the Unseen Narrator. THEY don't. And the Ministry isn't fond of Master Potter just now. Does Draco deserve to be punished? Certainly - he was dueling as well, and in fact initiated the duel. Does he deserve to die from it? Sorry, no - and had it NOT been Snape on the scene, he would have. He's been punished - by Harry. Now Harry has to take his medicine. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Thu Feb 15 03:22:05 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:22:05 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/ Molly In-Reply-To: References: <1B0126D8-BC11-4268-9A50-A2CBF14BB5CB@aim.com> Message-ID: <2795713f0702141922x489ee2aem5325adfcbf89e7a8@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164994 James Lyon: Her first three sons were smart enough to get out of the house when > the getting was good and do not want to spend any more time under her thumb then they can help. Lynda: Well, that certainly explains the reason Bill returns to the Weasley Burrough practically every weekend, as well as his reasoning in sending Fleur there for an extended visit. Interesting views I'm reading of the very, very human and flawed Molly Weasley... Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eviljunglechicken at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 01:56:53 2007 From: eviljunglechicken at yahoo.com (eviljunglechicken) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 01:56:53 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164995 > >>Alla: >> To me the self defense implies that nothing else can be done, period. << > >>Sherrie: >> Actually, it means the perp couldn't (or didn't try to) think of anything else that COULD be done. A Shield Charm? << > >>Alla: >> Actually he was slipping on the floor when he finally used Sectusemptra, so I see it as a last desperate attempt to defend himself.<< eviljunglechicken: So, somehow it is easier to whip out a curse while he is slipping which he has never attempted (but one that the readers are told he wants to try) rather than one of the ones he practiced and taught to other students. Sorry, but I don't follow that reasoning. It seems like going with what you are familiar with and are experienced with would be what would come to mind, especially in a defensive mode. I'd use something I knew would protect me. > >>Alla: >> Sectusemptra is not the best choice, sure, but I see nothing strange that when he is down, he would use the curse that he remembers marked for enemies. << eviljunglechicken: It's the marked "for enemies" exactly which have him reaching for this particular curse. He is in a fight with someone he has been at odds with for years and the adrenaline is pumping. He wants to hurt Draco because of their history. If all he was interested in was just defending himself, he could have used one of the charms, jinxes, hexes mentioned by Sherrie; but he doesn't merely want to defend, he wants to attack. I guess it's not strange that he would reach for this curse as he has used crucio as well. eviljunglechicken From avitaldrucker at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 02:51:26 2007 From: avitaldrucker at yahoo.com (Avital) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:51:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Draco's Personality (was:Re: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <813466.82272.qm@web33115.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 164996 > >>Sherrie: >> >>(For the record, BTW, I'm not a particular fan of young Master Malfoy - I think he's a spoiled young prince who should have had his britches warmed where they're tightest YEARS ago. << Avital: Sherrie, Malfoy's not as bad as you think he is. He has come from the wrong family and therefore tries to become a Death Eater (I think) in the 6th book, but his heart's really not in it. Remember the part right before Dumbledore dies when Malfoy lowers his wand a fraction of an inch? That shows that Malfoy would probably go on the Order of the Phoenix's side if not for his parents and the fact that Voldemort will kill him without hesitation if he does. Avital From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Feb 15 04:01:14 2007 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:01:14 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164997 eviljunglechicken: So, somehow it is easier to whip out a curse while he is slipping which he has never attempted (but one that the readers are told he wants to try) rather than one of the ones he practiced and taught to other students. Sorry, but I don't follow that reasoning. It seems like going with what you are familiar with and are experienced with would be what would come to mind, especially in a defensive mode. I'd use something I knew would protect me. Sherry now: I'm the other Sherry on the list. Actually, Harry was about to be tortured. In extreme moments, a person who knew they were in serious imminent danger of being tortured might reach for a nearby gun rather than trying to defend himself with his fists! A person could panic and do weird things he might not do in another situation. I am amazed at how it seems to be that Harry is so bad for trying to defend himself from torture, but Draco is an innocent victim. Sherry From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 15 04:22:07 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 23:22:07 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... References: Message-ID: <00c701c750b8$db826970$5f8c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 164998 > eviljunglechicken: > So, somehow it is easier to whip out a curse while he is slipping which he > has never attempted (but one that the readers are told he wants to try) > rather than one of the ones he practiced and taught to other students. > Sorry, but I don't follow that reasoning. > > It seems like going with what you are familiar with and are experienced > with > would be what would come to mind, especially in a defensive mode. I'd use > something I knew would protect me. > Sherry: > I'm the other Sherry on the list. > > Actually, Harry was about to be tortured. In extreme moments, a person > who > knew they were in serious imminent danger of being tortured might reach > for > a nearby gun rather than trying to defend himself with his fists! A > person > could panic and do weird things > he might not do in another situation. I am amazed at how it seems to be > that Harry is so bad for trying to defend himself from torture, but Draco > is > an innocent victim. Magpie: But that's a straw man! Who's trying to prove that Draco is an innocent victim? Everyone has agreed that there was an element of self-defense in Harry's own curse. Nobody's claiming that Draco was just standing there and Harry attacked him. So where does this "innocent victim Draco" keep coming up? Where are Draco's actions against Harry being justified? If anything it seems like Harry's the one who's getting extra victim points with all the horror scenarios of what we should assume would have happened if he hadn't thrown this exact curse that he had no way of imagining could possibly be aggressive!). -m From va32h at comcast.net Thu Feb 15 05:04:10 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 05:04:10 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore & Dursleys Once More With Feeling Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 164999 >From time to time we've discussed why Dumbledore had to leave Harry with the Dursleys - blood protection being the excuse for what is otherwise an act of cruelty and so on. I thought of that thread this evening as I was looking for some material for an essay I am working on about the literary tradition of close male friendships (working title: Guy Love: From the Epic of Gilgamesh to NBC's Scrubs, the Importance of the Male Bond in Literature.) I was looking for The Chosen - because of the friendship between Danny and Reuven. And I came across the part where Dannys' father explains why he raised his son in silence. Danny's father, Reb Saunders, fears his son's brilliant and analytical mind will render him soulless. He chooses to raise him in silence - he never speaks to the boy except during Talmud classes - as a way to force Danny into intropection, and develop a sense of his soul, and empathy for others. Reb Saunders wants Danny to "learn[s] of the pain of others by suffering one's own pain by turning inside oneself. . . . It makes us aware of how frail and tiny we are and of how much we must depend upon the Master of the Universe." The hope was that Danny would follow his father's footsteps, and be a Rabbi and a tzadik - a completely righteous individual - to his congregation, but Danny wants to study psychology - and when Reb Saunders realizes this, he can instead be a tzadik for the world. I can't believe I never saw the similarities before - is that not what Harry is - a completely righteous individual for the wizarding world? And Duh! Harry is called the Chosen One. I feel like an idiot for not seeing this sooner. Anyway - this raising a child in silence business is *not* given a free pass by anyone in the book. Danny suffers, Danny's friend Reuven considers it cruel as does Reuven's father. Repeatedly the characters are shown discussing whether the result of this method is worth its costs. Reb Saunders even acknowledges that he has given up a certain relationship with his son, in order to give him this compassion, this silence. It's certainly no endorsement of the practice...and yet by the end of the book you see why Saunders did it - and Danny does as well, and he is at peace with it and even appreciates it. I still understand the irritation readers feel with Dumbledore - but I'm so much more content in my own mind, now that I've made this connection. And even if you don't buy the connection - read The Chosen, if you haven't. It's such a wonderful book! va32h From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu Feb 15 05:16:43 2007 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 00:16:43 EST Subject: Draco's Personality (was:Re: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165000 In a message dated 2/14/2007 11:02:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, avitaldrucker at yahoo.com writes: Sherrie, Malfoy's not as bad as you think he is. He has come from the wrong family and therefore tries to become a Death Eater (I think) in the 6th book, but his heart's really not in it. Remember the part right before Dumbledore dies when Malfoy lowers his wand a fraction of an inch? That shows that Malfoy would probably go on the Order of the Phoenix's side if not for his parents and the fact that Voldemort will kill him without hesitation if he does. --------------------------------- I don't think he's irredeemable - I just don't LIKE him. For the record, I also don't like Ron Weasley or his brother Percy. Actually, some of the time I don't much like Harry. Don't much care for a lot of the kids - if I were a Hogwarts professor, I'd probably have a lot of Snapish attitudes, honestly. My point (besides the one on the top of my head) was that I wasn't saying that Harry should be punished because it was DRACO he hit with the spell - he should be punished for using it, period. Sherrie (it's after midnight here, elves!) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Feb 15 07:41:57 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 07:41:57 -0000 Subject: The intellect of Krum In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165001 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, puduhepa98 at ... wrote: > > > Posted by: "Bart Lidofsky" _bartl at ... _ > (mailto:bartl at ...?Subject= Re:%20The%20intellect%20of%20Krum) _bml07646 _ > (http://profiles.yahoo.com/bml07646) > Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:26 am (PST) > Geoff Bannister wrote: > Geoff: > > Being from the UK helps. Many years ago, there was a very funny actress > > who appeared regularly on the radio called Hermione Gingold and was a > > leading character in the film "Gigi". > > >Yes, she's the actress I was mentioning earlier. > > >Bart > > Nikkalmati > > Oh yes, I have hear of her, but I had totally forgotten the name and never > made the association with our Hermione. BTW in my reading I came across an > historical association with the name that no one may have heard of. The > Hermione was a famous 32-gun Royal Navy frigate that was the subject of a mutiny in > September 1797. She was taken over and most of the officers were killed. > The ship was turned over to the Spanish in Venezuela. Some of the crew were > eventually caught and hanged. The ship was renamed the Santa Cecilia, but in > a daring and dramatic rescue, she was retaken from Havana harbor by a group > of British sailors. She was renamed the Retribution. > > Nikkalmati Geoff: I discovered another reference a few days ago. In one of the Shakespeare plays with which I am not familiar - "A Winter's Tale", Leontes' queen is called Hermione. From rkelley at blazingisp.net Thu Feb 15 07:04:24 2007 From: rkelley at blazingisp.net (Rick & LeAnn Kelley) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 01:04:24 -0600 Subject: Weasley Family Dynamics Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165002 I have to chime in here. I LOVE Molly and Arthur. They're two of my favorite characters in the books, and I would literally boo-hoo if anything bad happened to them. Having raised three children myself, I believe Molly does very well to keep her sanity with the brood she's got. Most of them turned out very well. (Yes, Percy's a git, but there's one in every family. Not sure where he gets the pomposity.) Molly does have flaws, but perhaps she has a bit of an inferiority complex due to their impoverished circumstances, and overcompensates? I'm still her fan. The children constantly run her ragged, sneaking out at night and flying cars against Ministry laws, sneaking off into the Forbidden Forest at school, working with dragons, breaking curses in Egyptian tombs, and let's not even get into the scrapes Ron's gotten into with Harry, and the trouble the twins have gotten into. I think Molly tries to come off as a tyrant but she's really an old softie at heart, and her children know it and manipulate her ceaselessly but lovingly. Her children are not prim, proper little snits, but rather they are intelligent, interesting, resourceful, and she's very proud of them. She may do the wrong things sometimes, but it's usually for the right reasons. Her failings usually come from overprotection rather than smothering IMO, but in their world, who can blame her? Remember she already lost two brothers to LV. Her boggart showed us her greatest fears, and her amazing clock includes a hand for mortal peril, so that is a possibility she lives with daily. I applaud her ability to go through her day-to-day tasks without going completely bonkers. Arthur, IMHO is just a lovable, kind-hearted, kooky eccentric, who will someday make a wonderful grandfather, if JKR gives him the chance. I overlook Molly's and Arthur's flaws, because they have those qualities which are so important in Harry's world - they have the ability to love and show it shamelessly, and they stand on the side of right. I'll take them over Lucius and Narcissa anyday. Anders [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jlenox2004 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 13:27:19 2007 From: jlenox2004 at yahoo.com (jdl3811220) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 13:27:19 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore & Dursleys Once More With Feeling In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165003 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > > From time to time we've discussed why Dumbledore had to leave Harry > with the Dursleys - blood protection being the excuse for what is > otherwise an act of cruelty and so on. > > I thought of that thread this evening as I was looking for some > material for an essay I am working on about the literary tradition of > close male friendships (working title: Guy Love: From the Epic of > Gilgamesh to NBC's Scrubs, the Importance of the Male Bond in > Literature.) > > I was looking for The Chosen - because of the friendship between > Danny and Reuven. And I came across the part where Dannys' father > explains why he raised his son in silence. > > Danny's father, Reb Saunders, fears his son's brilliant and > analytical mind will render him soulless. He chooses to raise him in > silence - he never speaks to the boy except during Talmud classes - > as a way to force Danny into intropection, and develop a sense of his > soul, and empathy for others. Reb Saunders wants Danny to "learn[s] > of the pain of others by suffering one's own pain by turning inside > oneself. . . . It makes us aware of how frail and tiny we are and of > how much we must depend upon the Master of the Universe." > > The hope was that Danny would follow his father's footsteps, and be a > Rabbi and a tzadik - a completely righteous individual - to his > congregation, but Danny wants to study psychology - and when Reb > Saunders realizes this, he can instead be a tzadik for the world. > > I can't believe I never saw the similarities before - is that not > what Harry is - a completely righteous individual for the wizarding > world? And Duh! Harry is called the Chosen One. I feel like an idiot > for not seeing this sooner. > > Anyway - this raising a child in silence business is *not* given a > free pass by anyone in the book. Danny suffers, Danny's friend Reuven > considers it cruel as does Reuven's father. Repeatedly the characters > are shown discussing whether the result of this method is worth its > costs. Reb Saunders even acknowledges that he has given up a certain > relationship with his son, in order to give him this compassion, this > silence. > > It's certainly no endorsement of the practice...and yet by the end of > the book you see why Saunders did it - and Danny does as well, and he > is at peace with it and even appreciates it. > > I still understand the irritation readers feel with Dumbledore - but > I'm so much more content in my own mind, now that I've made this > connection. > > And even if you don't buy the connection - read The Chosen, if you > haven't. It's such a wonderful book! > > va32h Jenni from Alabama responds: Who is the author of The Chosen? I want to pick up that book the next time I'm at the library. Thanks! I can't help but hate the Dursleys. They weren't just silent to Harry, they were downright cruel. However, Dumbledore did what he felt was best for Harry. He loved Harry as a grandson and Harry adored him. I think Harry IS at peace with he & Dumbledore's relationship. The only thing Harry isn't at peace about is Dumbledore's trust in Snape - which brings us back to whether Snape is evil or not. And round and round we go. I'm still reserving judgement where Snape is regarded. My head tells me something isn't fitting right there. My heart is screaming for the murdering scumbag to be taken out. Regardless of Snape's 'state of being', Deathly Hallows is going to be an awesome read! I can't wait! Jenni From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 13:39:15 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 13:39:15 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165004 Alla: > I am sorry and no offense to you as well, but you keep calling it > unathorised dueling. I call it self defense and I do not remember > where in canon it says that student is forbidden to defend himself > from Unforgivable curse. > Sherry: > ------------------------------------- > Here's the thing, though - no one saw or heard Draco's attempt at an > Unforgiveable - I don't think even Myrtle witnessed it (and can ghosts testify, > anyway?). Based on what was observable to those who came on the scene, the > conclusion to be drawn would amount to "unauthorized dueling" (which technically > is what it was - one attacks, the other counters, regardless of the spells > used). No, it wasn't a formal duel, with the bows and salutes and all that rot > - but it was a duel nonetheless. Draco attacked, Harry countered - with > deadly force, regardless of the existence of other, viable options. That's what > would have been apparent to anyone coming on the scene, if they were kindly > disposed toward Harry. > > Put yourself into the story - you are Professor X (or whatever letter you > like). You are peacefully patrolling the corridors, thinking about a nightcap > or the quiz you're giving the third years tomorrow, chasing snogging students > out of crannies, when suddenly the most godawful racket erupts - it's coming > from the second floor girls' loo. You race over there, and find Myrtle > shrieking hysterically, the room a shambles, and Harry Potter standing over a > bleeding body. Quickly - judging ONLY by what you see, what happened? > > As was pointed out, Draco's Crucio was never completed - so would not even > register on his wand. Short of a full-fledged criminal investigation, with > Veritaserum, Legilimency (wonder why all Aurors aren't trained in that - useful > skill, I'd think, yeah?) and/or Penseive examination, there's no way to prove > Harry's not lying about it to try to justify his own infraction. WE know > he isn't, but we have the outside omniscience of the Unseen Narrator. THEY > don't. And the Ministry isn't fond of Master Potter just now. > Alla: But you are switching gears on me here :) or at least it feels like you do. I did not think we were talking about what McGonagall can conclude happened, you know? Sure, absolutely the fast conclusion that she can make is that Harry tried to murder Draco. I mean, I still say that this is not the **only** conclusion she can make, knowing the history between them, but definitely, it is one of them. But that is **precisely** what I hope she would not do, meaning I hope she would **not** make fast and **wrong** conclusions. I expect Snape jump to wrong conclusions, not her. I expect Minerva to make sure that truth is uncovered and not condemn Harry no matter what first impression is, and how convenient it looks. And the truth is that Draco was firing Unforgivable curse and Harry was protecting himself. I am going to even go as far as I almost never go, hehe. I refuse to call it my opinion. I think it is a fact. Sorry. I was talking about the truth of what happened, not how it would **look** from the first sight. Oh, and if Snape tried to legilimenc Harry, I am thinking that he could have done the same thing with Draco as well. Sherry: > Does Draco deserve to be punished? Certainly - he was dueling as well, and > in fact initiated the duel. Does he deserve to die from it? Sorry, no - and > had it NOT been Snape on the scene, he would have. He's been punished - by > Harry. Now Harry has to take his medicine. Alla: Does he deserve to die from it? If he chose to attack somebody who just walked in with the curse that may cause horrible pain and insanity? I do not know if he deserves to die from it, probably not, but I do not expect Draco's life to be Harry's first concern when he defends his sanity. Harry has to take his medicine for reading that curse in the first place, for sure, for wanting to use it. To make a long story short, I just refuse to accept that it was something **other** than self-defense. If you want to call it self- defense with wrong weapon, I can at least see where you are coming from, even though I would still call it self-defense with unknown weapon , hehe. But if you argue that something else **really** occurred other than Harry defending himself, I do not see where in canon you find the support for that. >> eviljunglechicken: > If all he was interested in was just defending himself, he could have > used one of the charms, jinxes, hexes mentioned by Sherrie; but he > doesn't merely want to defend, he wants to attack. > Alla: I have not noticed Harry wanting to attack when Draco used Unforgivable, in fact I have noticed him one of those harmless hexes at first and quite harmless as second and only as last attempt the one marked for enemies. IMO of course. > Magpie: > But that's a straw man! Who's trying to prove that Draco is an innocent > victim? Everyone has agreed that there was an element of self- defense in > Harry's own curse. Nobody's claiming that Draco was just standing there and > Harry attacked him. So where does this "innocent victim Draco" keep coming > up? Where are Draco's actions against Harry being justified? If anything it > seems like Harry's the one who's getting extra victim points with all the > horror scenarios of what we should assume would have happened if he hadn't > thrown this exact curse that he had no way of imagining could possibly be > aggressive!). Alla: In order to describe Draco as victim, it does not have to be said that Draco was just staying there while Harry attacked him IMO. It is also possible to do by changing self defense act into attempted murder OR by saying that what Harry really wanted to do while fallen and wet on the floor was to attack Draco. To me the implications of these arguments is that Draco suffered undeservingly from Harry's curse and that to me means that he is a victim. And if I saw it as anything other than self-defense, then sure Draco would be a victim, I mean he almost bled to death. When it is self defense, then attacker can still be a victim, but a victim of his own actions and that is what Draco to me in this scene. To me Harry using unknown curse and him having an absolute right to defend himself are two separate issues, I guess. Luckily, Harry is not a victim here, but he surely gets a **potential victim** points from me. Oh, and horror scenarios happened to Harry, they did not just appear put of nowhere. And Draco's father watched one of those scenarios no less. Is it such a stretch to think that Harry's subconscious remembers Graveyard well? From blink_883 at hotmail.com Thu Feb 15 13:42:30 2007 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 13:42:30 -0000 Subject: Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Liv In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702141453s14becb37x980eae118465a8f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165005 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jeremiah LaFleur" wrote: What if Lily and Petunia weren't blood sisters? Patricia ============================= Jeremiah: The whole story would fall apart and LV would have killed Harry by now. Also, If Petunia isn't Lily's blood sister then why would she have taken Harry in to begin with? Jeremiah __________________________________ Whirledgirl speculates: I think it's fair to say that one of the themes in the HP books is family. As in, alot of importance is given to family - whether by 'blood' like the Malfoys do, or more connected to love like the Weasleys. Not to mention Voldie's essential lack of a loving family. I would like to throw a theory out there and apologise if it has been talked about before, but don't ignore it out of hand if it's 'new'! : What if Petunia was adopted? Now, this doesn't mean that Harry's grandparents - his mother's side - would be magic. Lily could still have been the only witch in their family. DD says that Harry is protected as long as there is *somewhere* he can call *home*. Doesn't matter if they mistreat him, essentially show no love towards him, apparently. Why? Because of the stability. Harry knows what to expect from the Dursleys (unfortunately). Voldie as a child had only the stability he could create for himself, by controlling others, seeking power, using his 'special'-ness. Blood magic has not been given a good rep in the books either, examples I can bring to mind at the moment are things like when Voldie!Quirrel drinks Unicorn blood, and from that moment "living a half life". Why would DD 'protect' Harry using bloody magic anyway? The resistance DD shows in allowing Harry to go and live with the Weasleys - despite both parties' apparent desire for this to happen - shows that it may not be just 'blood ties'. Why? Because if it was, it wouldn't matter *where* Harry was. He now (in Ootp, HBP, even before - think sirius) *knows* that the Dursleys are his family. Why would moving somewhere make that any less true for him? It's not like students who take a gap year to live abroad return and have suddenly - magically - destroyed any familial ties they had. Therefore, it is possible that Lily and Petunia are *not* biological sisters, and would allow for Petunia to feel *some* kind of connection/responsibility for the offspring of a family who she was welcomed into, and mean that she felt a connection to Harry on a personal level because he was an orphan. Feel free to tear this apart any which way, it's a theory i've had semi-formed for some time now, would be interesting to see what happens...! - Whirledgirl, thinking that she may be late for her next class if she doesn't get a move on! From va32h at comcast.net Thu Feb 15 14:16:38 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:16:38 -0000 Subject: Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Liv In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165006 > Whirledgirl speculated: > What if Petunia was adopted? > > Now, this doesn't mean that Harry's grandparents - his mother's > side - would be magic. Lily could still have been the only witch in > their family. > > DD says that Harry is protected as long as there is *somewhere* he > can call *home*. Doesn't matter if they mistreat him, essentially > show no love towards him, apparently. Why? Because of the stability. > Harry knows what to expect from the Dursleys (unfortunately). Voldie > as a child had only the stability he could create for himself, by > controlling others, seeking power, using his 'special'-ness. va32h: What Dumbledore says is that as long as Harry can call home the place where his mother's blood dwells, Voldemort cannot harm him. Those are Dumbledore's specific words "where your mother's blood". Harry's protection is in his very blood - also Dumbledore's own words. This is why Quirrell could not touch him without burning his flesh. va32h From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Feb 15 14:24:47 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:24:47 -0000 Subject: Draco's Personality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165007 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, MadameSSnape at ... wrote: > In a message dated 2/14/2007 11:02:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, > avitaldrucker at ... writes: > > > Sherrie, Malfoy's not as bad as you think he is. He has come from the wrong > > family and therefore tries to become a Death Eater (I think) in the 6th book, > > but his heart's really not in it. Remember the part right before Dumbledore > > dies when Malfoy lowers his wand a fraction of an inch? That shows that > > Malfoy would probably go on the Order of the Phoenix's side if not for his parents > > and the fact that Voldemort will kill him without hesitation if he does. Sherrie: > I don't think he's irredeemable - I just don't LIKE him. For the record, I > also don't like Ron Weasley or his brother Percy. Actually, some of the time > I don't much like Harry. Don't much care for a lot of the kids - if I were > a Hogwarts professor, I'd probably have a lot of Snapish attitudes, honestly. > > My point (besides the one on the top of my head) was that I wasn't saying > that Harry should be punished because it was DRACO he hit with the spell - he > should be punished for using it, period. Geoff: One of the things I always like about the Harry Potter books is that there are many characters who display a variety of attitudes and outlooks and are not stereotyped into `goodies' or `baddies'. Unlike a lot of fiction, it's not the white hats versus the black hats but distinguishing which shade of grey hats the characters are wearing. :-) I have to admit that, although Dumbledore has vouched for Snape in the past and he appears to be on the side of the angels, I cannot stand the man. If possible I avoid threads involving him like the plague, He reminds me so much of a teacher I had when I was in my First Year at secondary school. Great was the loathing with which I loathed him. As for Ron, I have occasional misgivings about him. There are times when he lets his temper get the better of him and I suspect that he can get very physical when annoyed. He also can be quite jealous even of Harry ? perhaps especially of Harry. Draco. Ah yes, Draco. I have in the past said that, speaking from my own viewpoint as a Christian, I would agree with Sherrie that he is not irredeemable. If there wasn't an opportunity of redemption for all of us, then we would be in a sad state. Everyone has a chance unless they deliberately and specifically refuse to take the offer. I also have to admit that I have an irrational liking for him; don't ask me why because I can't quantify it. As avitaldrucker says, Draco comes from the wrong family. He is an only child, apparently with little contact with others outside Hogwarts, and has had nothing but Death Eater propaganda and superiority pumped into him. He has been denied the chance to really develop his own world view. As a teacher, I can remember pupils who came from similar backgrounds and who spouted the same discriminatory and closed mind dogma. Hopefully, the events of HBP might have prised open the door of his mind sufficiently to let a blast of down-to-earth common sense in. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 14:50:21 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:50:21 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165008 Alla wrote: > To me the self defense implies that nothing else can be done, > period. Which does not make Draco bleeding Okay, but neither would > it be Harry's responsibility IMO. Except thinking about the wrong > curse, IMO. Carol responds: Forgive me, but your reasoning is not quite consistent here. If "notthing else can be done," how can he have chosen "the wrong curse"? Surely, something else *could* have been done, including the old standbys, Expelliarmus and Stupefy. But instead of the DADA spells that have helped him so many times, Harry chose this moment to try out an unknown spell labeled "For enemies." (Better Draco than McLaggen, but still, not a wise move.) But if Harry had chosen Expelliarmus, Myrtle would not have screamed bloody murder, Snape would not have come running, Draco would not have been lying near death in a pool of his own blood, Snape would not have chanted that mysterious healing spell, Harry would not have lied and gotten detention, and Harry would not have hidden his book in the RoR (giving JKR a chance to mention the broken Vanishing Cabinet in passing). And, for that matter, Harry would not have missed the final Quidditch match, giving Ginny a chance to catch the Snitch and win the championship (and Harry a chance to kiss her). Harry's action, like all actions in the HP books, has unintended consequences that further the story and/or reveal character. (For one, it gives Draco a taste of death, making it real to him in a way that it wasn't before. And it links Snape to Sectumsempra through the countercurse and to the HBP's book in various ironic ways that Harry, who likes the HBP and hates Snape, is too blind to see.) Unfortunately, the one consequence that I would have liked to see, a hesitation on Harry's part to use Dark magic under any circumstances, even against Inferi and the supposed DE Snape, didn't happen. Harry's remorse got sidetracked into concern for the HBP's Potions book being confiscated and the secret of his Potions success being exposed to Slughorn, and he later attempts (unsuccessfully) to use both Sectumsempra and Crucio. (Okay for him but not for Draco? I think not.) If Snape had given Harry detention for using that spell instead of giving it for being a liar and a cheat (both true), that might have happened, but given the dynamics between Harry and Snape, probably not. He's going to have to learn his lesson some other way. BTW, Harry himself doesn't seem to think that self-defense justified using that curse since he listens to McGonagall lecturing him for "fifteen highly unpleasant minutes" and doesn't contradict her when she says he's lucky that he wasn't expelled. He's probably thanking his lucky stars that he *only* got detention. Until, that is, he finds out what the detention involves and that he'll miss the Quidditch match, at which point all contrition goes out the window and he's back to resenting Snape. Carol, glad that we got to see Healer!Snape in that scene but worried that Harry still hasn't learned his lesson From blink_883 at hotmail.com Thu Feb 15 15:04:10 2007 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:04:10 -0000 Subject: Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Liv In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165009 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > > va32h: > > What Dumbledore says is that as long as Harry can call home the place where his mother's blood dwells, Voldemort cannot harm him. Those are Dumbledore's specific words "where your mother's blood". Harry's protection is in his very blood - also Dumbledore's own words. This is why Quirrell could not touch him without burning his flesh. va32h Whirledgirl: It does seem like a farfetched theory by most standards, not least because it would seem out of the blue. But then, that wouldn't be the first time. If DD says "where your mother's blood" dwells, could we suppose a vial of her blood at all? anything along those lines? or if we take Harry's "mother's blood" to actually mean Harry himself? Could this work? If by "mother's bloody" DD means Harry, then the sentence would mean something along the lines of: 'where Harry dwells'. The whole idea of seeking/obtaining protection because of *blood* seems anomalous to how JKR has portrayed the importance of blood ties. Whirledgirl, wondering if DD read his horoscope. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 15:16:08 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:16:08 -0000 Subject: Portraits - Additional: Actors Playing a Role In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165010 bboyminn: > > Owlery2003, you are taking my 'actor' analogy too literally. I don't think for one second they hire an actor, throw him into the painting, and let him spend his life pretending to be someone else. No, the 'actor' metaphor simply illustrates how a portrait can portray a character with great depth, but still not be as fully realized as the represented person. > > The point is that the Portrait is NOT the real person but a /representation/ of the real person. A representation that has deep and intimate knowledge to draw on via the bit of the living person that has been placed in the painting. But, there is a limit to the portraits ability to draw from the bank of knowledge of the orignal person, just as an actor has a limited bank of knowledge to draw on to represent the character they play. > The real portrait can play the role of the real person personality and all, and do so very convincingly. It is only when you search for depth and meaning that you discover that the depth and meaning aren't really there. It is all show and no go. > > So, again, the whole point of using the 'actors' analogy was to address the limited depth we find in portraits. Their job is not to be the person, but to represent the person to the best of their limited ability. Carol responds: But the portrait isn't *portraying* the person. He's an *imprint* of the person as the person was in life, just as a ghost is a (stronger) imprint of the person's now departed soul. Nearly Headless Nick thinks, speaks, and acts exactly as he did in life, except that his activities and interests are more limited (lamenting that he canno longer enjoy banquets, providing information on the Sorting Hat, wanting to join the Headless Hunt--not a goal he would have pursued in life, but illustrative of his personality). NHN isn't acting; he's being himself to the degree that he can do so without a physical body. Ditto Professor Binns and Moaning Myrtle. The portraits, despite being two-dimensional and having more limited mobility, are much the same. They aren't acting (pretending to be someone else). Their thoughts and feelings are those of the person whose "imprint" they are (Phineas Nigellus's grief for his great-great-grandson is not feigned even though in life he never knew that great-great-grandson), but they can no longer take an active part in the world, being limited to observing, commenting, and "giving counsel." But something of the original wizard must be in them, as you've often postulated--not a soul bit or they'd be Horcruxes (as they clearly aren't--their subjects are all dead), but something analogous to the "brains" in the Sorting Hat, which enables it to think as the Founders did regarding the incoming first-years. I agree that the portrait is not the person and that a portrait is a representation or image, not a living being, but in the WW objects can sometimes think for themselves, and the thoughts of the portraits appear to be the thoughts that the person himself would have in the limited capacity of observer/advisor. They are not *acting* any more than the Sorting Hat or Diary!Tom (a memory made more powerful by the addition of a soul bit) are acting. Diary!Tom speaks, thinks, and acts exactly as sixteen-year-old Tom Riddle would have acted if he encountered a Time-Turning Harry in the Chamber of Secrets. The portraits, though they have no three-dimensional bodies and are not animated by soul bits, also speak and think for themselves in something beyond the "catch phrases" that JKR credits them with. In fact, that description is much more applicable to Mrs. Black, Sir Cadogan, and possibly the Fat Lady than it is to Phineas Nigellus--or, we can hope, to Portrait!Dumbledore. Carol, who realizes that Portrait!DD is not Dumbledore but still hopes that both he and Phineas will prove useful to Harry in DH From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 15:33:37 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:33:37 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165011 Sherrie wrote: > Still - even if he were off-balance, as you state, Harry had other options, short of that figurative shank. "Stupefy" should have come more easily to his lips than a spell he'd only just read - and it's easier to say quickly. Carol responds: Not only that, he knows what Stupefy and Expelliarmus will do. He's used them against Death Eaters. They are, after all, defensive spells intended for that purpose, not "for enemies," which sounds as Dark and deadly as it turns out to be. > Sherrie: > As for McGonagall NOT getting involved, had she been the teacher who arrived on the scene - I hope she'd have been at least as harsh on Harry as Snape was. Draco caused Harry no physical damage - indeed, short of Legilimency or a Penseive, there's no proof that Draco did anything at all, beyond Harry's word. Yet there he is, bleeding to death from wounds that are obviously not self-inflicted, with Harry the only possible suspect. > > A few detentions for bald-faced lying and cheek? Harry should be grateful that's ALL he got. Carol responds: Yes.As I said upthread, McGonagall makes it clear that she approves of Snape's detentions and that Harry should consider himself lucky that he wasn't expelled. (And we might think about *why* Snape didn't avail himself of that option.) I don't think that as self-defense plea would have justified Harry's actions in the eyes of the school governors or the MoM considering that other options, known defensive spells that Harry had used many times, were available. Using an unknown spell labeled "for enemies" is like saying "But I didn't know the gun was loaded." If he doesn't know what it does but it's clearly dangerous, it's just plain stupid to use it. However, if McGonagall had arrived on the scene instead of Snape, Harry would be facing something much worse than expulsion or detentions with Snape. He'd be facing charges for manslaughter or second-degree murder. McGonagall is a Transfiguration teacher, not a DADA expert or Healer. Snape is the inventor of the spell that Harry used. He recognized it instantly and knew the counterspell. Possibly, he invented it (or discovered it in some obscure book of ancient magic). I doubt that anyone else, including Madam Pomfrey and even Dumbledore himself, could have saved Draco. Both boys are extremely lucky that Snape was there. Carol, who does realize that Harry was in an awkward position and considered Draco capable of casting a Crucio but nevertheless thinks he had better options than Sectumsempra and needs to resist the temptation to use Dark magic under any circumstances From eviljunglechicken at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 14:13:01 2007 From: eviljunglechicken at yahoo.com (eviljunglechicken) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:13:01 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165012 eviljunglechicken previously: > So, somehow it is easier to whip out a curse while he is slipping > which he has never attempted (but one that the readers are told he > wants to try) rather than one of the ones he practiced and taught > to other students. Sorry, but I don't follow that reasoning. > > It seems like going with what you are familiar with and are > experienced with would be what would come to mind, especially in a > defensive mode. I'd use something I knew would protect me. Sherry Gomes wrote: > Actually, Harry was about to be tortured. In extreme moments, a > person who knew they were in serious imminent danger of being > tortured might reach for a nearby gun rather than trying to defend > himself with his fists! A person could panic and do weird things > he might not do in another situation. I am amazed at how it seems > to be that Harry is so bad for trying to defend himself from > torture, but Draco is an innocent victim. eviljunglechicken: As I used the word protect (defend or guard from attack, injury...) in regards to Harry, I don't see how I am arguing that Draco is an innocent victim. It is Draco from whom Harry is trying to protect himself. As for the analogy of reaching for a gun instead of using fists... Yes, I agree someone might reach for a gun instead of using fists. If I reached for a gun a significant part of that action would be my belief fists would likely be an ineffective defense (this is not the case with many of the spells with which Harry has expertise... they can defend him), and I would expect it to shoot bullets into my attacker, doing serious damage. Do you believe then that Harry knows what the curse will do? A curse (or gun he's been toting in your comparison) he has been hoping to use on someone. In the Flight of the Prince, Snape blocks many of Harry's curses. This is a great example of being in defensive mode. Is it understandable for Harry to want to not only defend himself but to be on the offensive as well? I think it is. There is bad history between the two boys. My point is Harry wanted more than just to defend himself and I think Harry knows that too. eviljunglechicken From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 15:44:51 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:44:51 -0000 Subject: Random Questions from The Boy Who Lived In-Reply-To: <45D3C727.2020202@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165013 montims wrote: > > actually, it says: "None of them noticed a large tawny owl flutter past the window"... I have had the thought that maybe the owl was bringing a letter to Prof McGonagall, who - as a cat - was on the corner of the street when Vernon left, reading a map. She wouldn't have needed a map to Privet Drive, as she was already there. Was she tracking Hagrid's progress??? > > Bart: > Or perhaps scouting out Mrs. Figg's house? Carol: More likely, IMO, the owl is delivering a letter to Mrs. Figg from Dumbledore, informing her that Baby!Harry will be left on the Dursleys' doorstep that night and will require a guard (Mrs. Figg or her cats). Carol, who always wondered how a toddler could stay safely on a doorstep for five or six hours, blood protection or no, and thinks Mrs. Figg is the answer From fairwynn at hotmail.com Thu Feb 15 15:51:58 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:51:58 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165014 > Alla: > > > I am sorry and no offense to you as well, but you keep calling it > > unathorised dueling. I call it self defense and I do not remember > > where in canon it says that student is forbidden to defend > himself > > from Unforgivable curse. wynnleaf Whatever Harry *thought* he was doing, let's get a couple of things straight. 1. If Harry thought Sectumsempra was likely to be a powerful curse to use on real-for-sure, dangerous and deadly enemies, then his recent intention to use it on McClaggen when his back is turned was absolutely horrible, showing all manner of evil intent. 2. If Harry thought Sectumsempra wasn't all that bad, and something he could safely use on someone for whom he had mostly petty irritations (McClaggen), then he was being rather stupid to use it to defend against a crucio. Since I doubt that JKR wants us to think Harry was willing to use a deadly spell against McClaggen, I think we have to assume that Harry used Sectumsempra rather stupidly -- not choosing it because he thought it would likely be an excellent spell to use against someone casting an unforgiveable, but just using it because he'd been going around with it on his mind (to use the next chance McClaggen turned his back). So basically what this scene shows us about Harry is that he had this Sectumsempra spell in his head, that he had no clue what it would do, but he didn't think it any more nasty than a nail-growing hex. He used it against Draco, not as some strategic tactic against an unforgiveable, but because it was a spell he'd had on his mind. When the spell was obviously very deadly, Harry was shocked to the core. Now as far as Snape goes... Whether anyone might have thought Harry was justified in using Sectumsempra against a crucio makes no difference whatsoever, because no one other than Draco and Harry know about the crucio, nor *can* they know. Why -- if Harry himself isn't offering the defence of "he tried to crucio me!" or any defense at all for that matter -- should Snape or anyone else try to "get to the bottom" of the situation and find out what evil thing Draco was doing that would exonnerate Harry? If Harry had been saying he only did it in self-defence, then sure perhaps Snape should have investigated more. But without Harry saying anything, there's no reason to assume it was anything more than a school fight that only turned ugly when Harry used the Sectumsempra. Last.. why was Harry punished? Snape didn't punish Harry for using Sectumsempra. So any arguments about why was Harry getting punished for using it in self-defense don't even fit the situation. Harry was punished for blatantly lying to Snape about where he found that Dark Magic spell and the potions book, which Snape knew perfectly well Harry had hidden from him. Arguments about how justified Harry was to use a deadly spell that Harry himself thought was fine to use against McClaggen make little sense. Harry himself didn't try to justify his actions to Snape or McGonagall, therefore neither teacher had the slightest reason to attempt to sort through whether he had any good excuse. wynnleaf > Alla: > > But you are switching gears on me here :) or at least it feels like > you do. > > I did not think we were talking about what McGonagall can conclude > happened, you know? > > Sure, absolutely the fast conclusion that she can make is that Harry > tried to murder Draco. I mean, I still say that this is not the > **only** conclusion she can make, knowing the history between them, > but definitely, it is one of them. > > But that is **precisely** what I hope she would not do, meaning I > hope she would **not** make fast and **wrong** conclusions. > > I expect Snape jump to wrong conclusions, not her. I expect Minerva > to make sure that truth is uncovered and not condemn Harry no matter > what first impression is, and how convenient it looks. wynnleaf Look. You find two kids fighting. One is hurt very, very badly. The other offers no excuse and no defense -- not anything. Harry doesn't say "Draco attacked me" or "Draco tried to crucio me." No. So without Harry saying there's any more to it than is obvious, there's no reason for either McGonagall or Snape to investigate further. What? You think they should just assume that Harry would keep quiet about Draco using an unforgiveable? Harry had already been telling people his suspicions about Draco in regards other activities. If Harry wasn't saying anything about Draco's behavior in the bathrooms, why should anyone wonder if Draco was doing anything worse than the average school hexes? > Alla > And the truth is that Draco was firing Unforgivable curse and Harry > was protecting himself. I am going to even go as far as I almost > never go, hehe. I refuse to call it my opinion. I think it is a > fact. Sorry. wynnleaf Harry was "protecting" himself with a spell that he thought would be fine to use on the irritating McClaggen when his back was turned. That hopefully means that Harry thought the spell was pretty innocuous -- which means he wasn't doing a very good intentional job of "protecting" himself, was he? Alla > I was talking about the truth of what happened, not how it would > **look** from the first sight. > Oh, and if Snape tried to legilimenc Harry, I am thinking that he > could have done the same thing with Draco as well. wynnleaf Why should Snape do that? Legilimency against a kid who has just been bleeding to death? Based on what evidence? Had Harry made any accusations? Why should Snape suspect Draco of something as bad as Sectemsempra or an unforgiveable, when Harry hadn't accused Draco of anything at all? > Alla: > > Does he deserve to die from it? If he chose to attack somebody who > just walked in with the curse that may cause horrible pain and > insanity? > > I do not know if he deserves to die from it, probably not, but I do > not expect Draco's life to be Harry's first concern when he defends > his sanity. wynnleaf Yep, Harry's first concern should be to use a spell he thought not much more powerful than a nail-growing hex or levicorpus, right? Because supposedly, he *didn't* think Sectumsempra was any stronger a spell than the others -- or he hopefully wouldn't plan to use it on McClaggen. Or do you think Harry *did* think it a powerful spell to use on real, nasty, life-threatening enemies? Then Harry's intention to use it on McClaggen was evil, right? Sorry, you can't have it both ways. Either Harry stupidly used what he thought was a weaker spell to counter a crucio, or he planned to use a powerful and dangerous spell against McClaggen. Alla > To make a long story short, I just refuse to accept that it was > something **other** than self-defense. wynnleaf Considering that Harry (hopefully) didn't know he was using such a powerful spell, yes, I think we'd have to assume that Harry knew plenty of other spells that he could be sure would be powerful enough to stop Draco. Much more powerful than he (hopefully) supposed the Sectumsempra to be. Like I said -- you can't have it both ways. If Harry didn't know that spell was so terrible, and instead thought it no different from the rest of the Prince's hexes, then Harry had a wide array of other choices of spells to choose from which he'd know could be as or more effective against Draco. > Alla: > > I have not noticed Harry wanting to attack when Draco used > Unforgivable, in fact I have noticed him one of those harmless hexes > at first and quite harmless as second and only as last attempt the > one marked for enemies. IMO of course. wynnleaf Harry used the milder hexes first. But you're saying that Harry then used Sectumsempra as some sort of last resort against an unforgiveable. But if you really think Harry believed Sectumsempra to be so powerful -- how do you explain his willingness to use it against McClaggen? On the contrary, his willingness to use it against McClaggen makes it more likely that Harry thought the spell to be milder. Which means he should have chosen what he knew to be a stronger spell against Draco (like expelliarmus, or stupify), if he was really trying to give his best defensive action. > Alla: > > In order to describe Draco as victim, it does not have to be said > that > Draco was just staying there while Harry attacked him IMO. wynnleaf I can't think of anyone who has considered Draco a "victim," exactly. Draco is not innocent at all. However, Harry's use of a spell about which he was ignorant almost cost Draco his life. Draco doesn't have to be innocent to make taking his life the wrong choice. The biggest problem for Harry's use of Sectumsempra is that he used a spell in complete ignorance as to its power and almost killed someone who didn't deserve *death* even if he did deserve punishment. That may be the reason Harry never told Snape or McGonagall what Draco had done. Perhaps he thought Draco's almost bleeding to death was enough. wynnleaf From va32h at comcast.net Thu Feb 15 16:00:47 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 16:00:47 -0000 Subject: Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Liv In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165015 Whirledgirl: It does seem like a farfetched theory by most standards, not least because it would seem out of the blue. But then, that wouldn't be the first time. If DD says "where your mother's blood" dwells, could we suppose a vial of her blood at all? anything along those lines? or if we take Harry's "mother's blood" to actually mean Harry himself? Could this work? If by "mother's bloody" DD means Harry, then the sentence would mean something along the lines of: 'where Harry dwells'. The whole idea of seeking/obtaining protection because of *blood* seems anomalous to how JKR has portrayed the importance of blood ties. va32h: I don't know why it seems odd for Dumbledore's character to be talking of blood ties - it is ancient magic, he didn't invent it, he's just using it. While JKR certainly rejects the notion that our destinies are limited by our blood, blood is a recurrent motif in the series. Notions of bad blood, blood will out,half-bloods, pure- bloods, the uses of dragon's blood, the blood Voldemort extracts from Harry for his regeneration potion, the blood sacrifice that Harry and Dumbledore must pay to get in and out of the cave. "Harry's mother's blood" is not Harry himself. It is another blood relative. I do not have a copy of OoTP handy, but perhaps if you reread that passage from the book, rather than relying on my paraphrasing, it will make more sense. What purpose does it serve to have Petunia adopted? How would Petunia being adopted enhance or illuminate any of the themes and motifs in the series? If you find the notion of Dumbledore taking Harry to a blood relative unappealing, what on earth is so much more appealing about having Lily's blood drawn and kept in a vial in the Dursley home just so we can say that Petunia is adopted? That is not only far-fetched, it's silly. va32h From va32h at comcast.net Thu Feb 15 16:05:21 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 16:05:21 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165016 Wynnleaf: Since I doubt that JKR wants us to think Harry was willing to use a deadly spell against McClaggen, I think we have to assume that Harry used Sectumsempra rather stupidly -- not choosing it because he thought it would likely be an excellent spell to use against someone casting an unforgiveable, but just using it because he'd been going around with it on his mind (to use the next chance McClaggen turned his back). So basically what this scene shows us about Harry is that he had this Sectumsempra spell in his head, that he had no clue what it would do,but he didn't think it any more nasty than a nail-growing hex. va32h interjecting here: You know what has always bothered me about Sectumsempra? Why doesn't Harry know what it does? Or at least have a guess. Most of the spells they learn are derived from Latin words...I am twenty years out of my high school Latin class, and I remembered enough to know that Sectumsempra had something to do with "cutting" and "always". I could make an educated guess about the effects of the spell. So either Harry is even dimmer than we think, or Classical education is very shoddy at Hogwarts. va32h From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 15 16:32:12 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 16:32:12 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165017 > > Alla: > > I have not noticed Harry wanting to attack when Draco used > Unforgivable, in fact I have noticed him one of those harmless hexes > at first and quite harmless as second and only as last attempt the > one marked for enemies. IMO of course. Magpie: I think Carol answered a lot of the things raised in her own post, but I do think this issue is a sticking point in the scene as well. I think the scene has some deliberate ambiguity that's set up throughout the book(s) and if the whole thing is a simple oopsie where the violence caused in no way says anything to or about Harry at all I wonder why the author's chose this bizarre spell (this spell and Levicorpus seeming to hold certain significance in terms of their creator's motives in making them). Saying he only uses the "for enemies" spell as a last attempt seems to suggest exactly this, that Harry knew he was pulling out something *serious*. If he thought it was just a self-defense spell or a light spell that wasn't that harmful why would it be something he'd only use when pushed to it? Claims that Harry fears not only what his own experience with Crucio has taught him but lifelong dementia seems be about justifying the deadly force, yet it's also important that Harry did not intend to use force. Unlike in other fights they've had Harry is not furious and obsessed with hurting Malfoy--but it's still Malfoy. Not hurting him isn't a priority and he's got years of hatred under his belt. He wasn't planning on slicing him open, but afterwards, I would imagine it would be very difficult to explain to himself just what he *thought* he was throwing in that moment that made him reach for that unknown curse, and what he wanted. How far was he willing to go to get Malfoy off his back, if not that far? Later he's vaguely aware that he's got some issues of conscience somewhere for some reason, that he's not examining. What's the point of those twinges of conscience if this scene is purely about self- defense? It's not like Harry's usually has trouble with guil after fights. On the contrary, he usually feels okay with what he did. So why does he feel a bit squirmy now? Especially with Malfoy up and about, good as new? (As we know from Ron--Harry, who's been obsessed with him all year, makes no note of Malfoy's return to classes.) He seems to feel like he did something wrong, so what does he think he did wrong? I don't actually think "choosing the wrong spell" covers it, because I can't see why Harry wouldn't be open about that. He relates to Sectumsempra from the time he's read it as an offensive spell to use on people he doesn't like ("enemies"). I don't think in the split second when he's on the floor he has time to rethink the meaning of enemies into people who might be attacking him and so the spell isn't aggressive. Harry really understands the Prince well and has a "relationship" with him--I don't think their relationship is marked by this kind of naivite on Harry's part. Ginny compares it briefly to her own experience with a book in CoS, but Harry correctly sees this is not the same. He's not innocent 11- year-old Ginny being played by Tom Riddle. It would surprise me if JKR wrote a scene for her 16-year-old heroic protagonist who's great power is love--a scene in the running for the most gruesome and violent scene in all of canon--expecting the violence to mean nothing. Carol's post points out all the important things that come out of this scene--yet also notes that none of them have to do with the violence or Harry's thoughts about using Dark Magic himself. And also I'd note that HBP has a lot of unintended violence in it--I think that's one of the themes, actually. So that's why in answer to questions like "what if Harry had just used a stupefy and Draco had fallen and gotten hurt" just make me say: why *didn't* Harry (or why didn't JKR make Harry) stupefy Draco? For that matter, why not have Harry use Levicorpus, another spell that comes from the Prince's book and has similar associations in canon. That, too, could have led Snape to figure out that Harry had his book. He could still be brought to the bathroom by the sound of fighting. Harry didn't consciously use Dark Magic, but he did use the right spell in the right situation, which he knew by reading the Prince's note on its use. And he's using it on a character he's hated for years, who has driven him to violence before. It also seems important for the HBP story. Why does Harry feel such an understanding with the Prince? It seems to me one of the things going on is that Snape and Harry have things in common, including things that led to Snape's own use of violent spells. This incident doesn't destroy his relationship with the Prince--that takes the revelation that the Prince is Snape. wynnleaf: Since I doubt that JKR wants us to think Harry was willing to use a deadly spell against McClaggen, I think we have to assume that Harry used Sectumsempra rather stupidly -- not choosing it because he thought it would likely be an excellent spell to use against someone casting an unforgiveable, but just using it because he'd been going around with it on his mind (to use the next chance McClaggen turned his back). Magpie: I somewhat disagree. Harry has no idea the spell is deadly, but there are no spells that are obviously an excellent spell to use against someone casting an Unforgivable--except a spell that's purely defensive and sheilds you from the Unforgivable. Anything beyond that is presumably punishment. For me this goes back to the imo important understanding between Harry and the Prince. I got the impression that when he's just read the spell he's hoping to "try it out" on McLaggen to see what it does, because McLaggen is disliked by him enough to be a satisfying guinea pig. He does assume that it doesn't kill--but then, the spell doesn't kill. Had he just tried it out on McLaggen the way he was planning it wouldn't have been deadly at all, most likely. The reason it's deadly on Malfoy is in large part due to Harry's own state of mind. wynnleaf: So basically what this scene shows us about Harry is that he had this Sectumsempra spell in his head, that he had no clue what it would do, but he didn't think it any more nasty than a nail-growing hex. He used it against Draco, not as some strategic tactic against an unforgiveable, but because it was a spell he'd had on his mind. Magpie: He doesn't have the spell on his mind throughout the fight with Draco, since he doesn't use it. He uses it, imo instinctively, in the way he's been instructed to use it--"for enemies." Not for pranks against annoying people like all the other spells in the book. It's not there in the book with other fun hexes like nail growing spells. It's there with a specific, dark note: For enemies. I think Harry understands as well as I, an average reader, did that this was more than a Prank spell. If JKR wanted to write it as all about Harry being shocked that the spell was actually dark, I don't think she'd have had young!Snape helpfully identify the spell as "for enemies." It could just have been yet another spell Harry read the word for, the last one in the book he hadn't tried. I think this is definitely something Harry would be asking himself, at least, and can never know the answer to, importantly, at least not until he seriously analyzes his own feelings. wynnleaf: Arguments about how justified Harry was to use a deadly spell that Harry himself thought was fine to use against McClaggen make little sense. Harry himself didn't try to justify his actions to Snape or McGonagall, therefore neither teacher had the slightest reason to attempt to sort through whether he had any good excuse. Magpie: There I definitely agree. No one in canon considers this an issue at all. Harry isn't trying to defend himself by saying he did it in self-defense (nobody's accusing him of otherwise), but he's not keeping in a secret either. His friends know what happened, and they don't unanimously think this is the most important thing. Actually, it's kind of interesting what different things they focus on. Ginny's the only person who takes this position, which makes Harry happy, but does not keep him from feeling squirmy about it later. -m From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Feb 15 16:41:24 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 16:41:24 -0000 Subject: Lupin/ Father Figures In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0702141923p60b55ae4lb183fd098a0eb739@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165018 > Debbie: > Lupin did nothing with his information about Sirius, even though he > sincerely believed Sirius was guilty, because for him to become involved > would risk exposing past actions that would reflect badly on him. > I have trouble seeing where Lupin can be said to have internalized this > view. He has internalized the WW's view that he is dangerous, but it's not > the same thing as being evil. To be evil presupposes that you can choose > good instead. Pippin: But to be Dark presupposes that the choice is made for you. "Werewolves are so mistrusted by most of our kind" says Dumbledore. As you say, Lupin can't confess because his past actions would reflect badly on him. He thinks he can't be forgiven, even by his friends, for what he's done. He's internalized the view that his transgressions would show that he's a monster. Debbie: Werewolves cannot choose to be something else. (However, > they can choose to be evil, as Fenrir Greyback demonstrates.) Pippin: Would Fenrir admit to being evil? Or would he say that he has a right to revenge? > Pippin: > But if he did indeed internalize > that view, then he wouldn't need to "join the forces of > evil." He would think he had joined them already. And > that is the way Voldemort works. He doesn't bang on your > door and invite you to join the forces of evil. He joins > *you*. > > Debbie: > I have been struggling to interpret this paragraph since I first read it. The only sense I can make of it is that Voldemort convinces you that you are inherently evil. Pippin: Sorry to be unclear. I meant that we've heard from quite a few DE's and none of them became Voldemort supporters because they wanted to join the forces of evil. Voldemort doesn't approach people by asking them to go against their consciences. He approaches by offering people what they want most, and as Dumbledore says, very often what we want most is bad for us. Lupin would realize that, he always realizes when he wants something that would be bad. But... Self-loathing can cause even the most tender conscience to lose its power. You can say Lupin would never join the DE's because his friends would hate him and he would hate himself ...but the trouble is, he hates himself already, and he thinks that if his friends understood what he was truly like, they'd hate him too. It's hard to lose your self-respect when you haven't got any. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Feb 15 17:02:47 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:02:47 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165019 > Pippin: > > I am not questioning Harry's right to defend himself, > > but he still chose to supply himself with an illegal weapon. > > Alla: > > I disagree. I think he chose to supply himself with unknown weapon, > which is also bad, but not illegal, or at least he did not know that > it was. > Pippin: I would be extremely disappointed in Minerva, Harry and JKR if any of them accepted ignorance of the law as an excuse. Harry at least has the sense not to offer it. The fact that he finds his punishment burdensome is hardly proof that he considers it undeserved. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 17:04:29 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:04:29 -0000 Subject: Lupin/ Father Figures In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0702141923p60b55ae4lb183fd098a0eb739@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165020 Debbie: Carol earlier: > (And BTW, we know that DD placed an ad in the Daily Prophet after Lockhart was incapacitated; it's one of the things he mentions in the post-Basilisk interview with Harry. So probably that's how Lupin found out about the job, and DD, given both the Black situation and his policy of sheltering strays, not to mention that he actually knew something about Dark creatures, would have been happy to hire him.) > > Debbie: > I appreciate your encyclopedic knowledge of canon; I had forgotten that DD had placed an ad. Yet since Lupin seems to view himself as all but unemployable, I'm not convinced he would respond to an ad. After Lockhart (who *is* the type to respond to an ad), I think DD had to recruit the DADA professors, and after GoF, he ran out of options. Carol again: That's also a possibility. Maybe no one responded to the ad and DD recruited Lupin as he recruited the real Mad-Eye in GoF. It does seem like more than coincidence that Sirius Black's old friend is the DADA teacher when Black is supposedly out to murder Harry. But *if* Lupin applied for the job on his own initiative (and the peeling letters on his suitcase, "Professor R. J. Lupin," suggest that he's been teaching somebody somewhere), Dumbledore would not have turned him down. Maybe DD hoped, as he had hoped when he made Lupin a Prefect, that Lupin's knowledge of his old friend could be used to protect the students. If so, he was wrong. Lupin's desire to protect his secrets, and his ability to lie to himself, made the attacks on the Fat Lady and on Ron's bedcurtains possible. And he should have turned in the Marauder's Map to Dumbledore even if it meant confessing that he was one of the makers and that his friends were Animagi. But he placed his own job security and Dumbledore's (unfounded) trust above the students', and particularly Harry's, safety. Debbie: > This is what I meant by dangerousness. It was dangerous to Lupin's own defense mechanisms. Carol: Okay. I agree, then. Lupin's secretiveness is a form of self-protection, and he's hiding more than his being a werewolf (which DD and the staff already know). He's concealing everything he knows about Sirius Black that could be useful in catching him, and he doesn't want Harry to know how close he was to Sirius Black and James Potter as a boy. Every scene between Harry and Lupin is full of missed opportunities for one to confess something to the other. (Harry decides not to tell Lupin about the "Grim" or the conversation he overheard in the Three Broomsticks. Lupin could have spared Harry that painful eavesdropping scene if he'd told Harry that Black was his godfather. Is his motive for secrecy the same as Mr. Weasley's, to keep Harry from going after Black, or self-protection, or both? He doesn't even tell Harry how he knows that the Marauder's Map is a Map--or how to work it--and Harry, who likes and trusts him, doesn't pursue the matter. Debbie: > In addition, while Lupin may fail at being a father figure, in PoA he demonstrates an ability and an interest in providing the kind of mentorship one might expect from a good teacher, giving hours of his free time to each Harry the Patronus, and giving good advice (doing a much better job than Snape in the Snape's Grudge chapter after Draco sees Harry's head in Hogsmeade). Carol: Oh, yes. Lupin can pull a very effective guilt trip when he so chooses (in contrast to Snape, whose resentment of James gets in the way) and hold back crucial information about the Marauder's Map at the same time. And did you notice all the excuses he makes to postpone or try to curtail the Patronus lessons (which Harry only wants so that he can defeat Slytherin at Quidditch without being distracted by Dementors? "I'll try and help. But it'll have to wait until next term, I'm afraid. I have a lot to do before the holidays. I chose a very inconvenient time to fall ill" (PoA Am. ed. 189). "I don't pretend to be an expert at fighting Dementors, Harry. Quite the contrary" (189). "Lupin looked paler than usual. 'Harry, if you don't want to continue, I will more than understand'" (239). "Listen, Harry.--perhaps we should leave it at that for tonight. This charm is ridiculously advanced. I shouldn't have suggested putting you through this" (241). "'Can we have another go? Just one more go?' "'Not now,' said Lupin firmly. 'You've had enough for tonight'" (242). Harry has had glimpses, or rather he's heard voices, recalling the deaths of his mother and father at Godric's Hollow. Is Lupin merely feeling compassion for Harry, feeling that putting him through the lessons with a Boggart!Dementor is somehow worse than facing a real Dementor? Are Harry's memories so painful for Lupin that he wants to stop the lessons regardless of the consequences for Harry? Is Lupin worried that those memories will reveal something about *him* that he doesn't want Harry to know? BTW, Lupin's sharp reaction when Harry asks him if he knew Sirius Black ("Lupin turned very quickly. 'What gives you that idea?' he said sharply" (PoA Am. ed. 242) reminds me of Aunt Petunia when Vernon asks her about the Potters in SS/PS ("As he had expected, Mrs. Dursley looked shocked and angry. . . . 'No,' she said sharply. 'Why?'" [SS 7]) Both Lupin and Petunia are hiding something. Carol, who doesn't deny that Lupin can be an effective teacher when he so chooses and that he has a good grasp of adolescent psychology but still feels that Lupin's selfish spinelessness is more dangerous than Snape's sarcasm From fairwynn at hotmail.com Thu Feb 15 17:15:21 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:15:21 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165021 > > wynnleaf: > Since I doubt that JKR wants us to think Harry was willing to use a > deadly spell against McClaggen, I think we have to assume that Harry > used Sectumsempra rather stupidly -- not choosing it because he > thought it would likely be an excellent spell to use against someone > casting an unforgiveable, but just using it because he'd been going > around with it on his mind (to use the next chance McClaggen turned > his back). > > Magpie: > I somewhat disagree. Harry has no idea the spell is deadly, but > there are no spells that are obviously an excellent spell to use > against someone casting an Unforgivable--except a spell that's > purely defensive and sheilds you from the Unforgivable. Anything > beyond that is presumably punishment. > > For me this goes back to the imo important understanding between > Harry and the Prince. I got the impression that when he's just read > the spell he's hoping to "try it out" on McLaggen to see what it > does, because McLaggen is disliked by him enough to be a satisfying > guinea pig. He does assume that it doesn't kill--but then, the spell > doesn't kill. Had he just tried it out on McLaggen the way he was > planning it wouldn't have been deadly at all, most likely. The > reason it's deadly on Malfoy is in large part due to Harry's own > state of mind. wynnleaf I have no problem addressing the issue of Harry actually understanding that Sectumsempra really was a spell to be used on *true* enemies -- people who really are a threat. But if we're going to do that, then we have to look seriously at what that means for Harry to intend to use it on McLaggen. If Harry sees Sectumsempra as something at least as powerful as say, Stupify, would he then consider it okay to stupify McLaggen? Is this what JKR wants us to consider? I'm not sure exactly which way she wants us to view it. I think it's somewhat ambiguous. But once again, it can't fall both ways. If Harry really thought that spell was something you use against a *real* threat, and yet was willing to use it on McLaggen, then Harry is not by any means the "good guy" he'd like to consider himself. Of course, I tend to see some other past actions of Harry to be extremely questionable, but at least most of those are against people (Draco and Co.) that Harry at least really thinks support Voldemort. But McLaggen is just an irritating guy who is causing Harry a few headaches in the Quidditch and romance departments. So this becomes a far more serious problem if Harry is willing to toss out a spell at McLaggen that he truly considers in a different realm -- that of spells for true enemies and dire threat. Oh, I'm not theorizing the "Dark Harry" sort of idea. I just mean that Harry sees himself as on the side of the good guys, therefore most of his actions and feelings are correspondingly considered okay. Maybe Sectumsempra is a wake-up call. But if so, Harry seems to mostly disregard it. >wynnleaf > He used it against Draco, not as some strategic tactic against an > unforgiveable, but because it was a spell he'd had on his mind. > > Magpie: > He doesn't have the spell on his mind throughout the fight with > Draco, since he doesn't use it. He uses it, imo instinctively, in > the way he's been instructed to use it--"for enemies." Not for > pranks against annoying people like all the other spells in the > book. wynnleaf When I said he used it because he had it on his mind, I didn't mean that he was thinking of it in that immediate context, but that he'd been considering its use for some time. If, as you say, Harry really didn't think of this as a spell for annoying people, but truly for enemies, then why plan to use it on McLaggan? And when his back is *turned* no less! I'm not disagreeing with you, Magpie. I'm just asking what you think this really means about Harry. > Magpie > I think this is definitely something Harry would be asking himself, > at least, and can never know the answer to, importantly, at least > not until he seriously analyzes his own feelings. wynnleaf If you're right, and this was JKR's intention, then hopefully we'll see Harry address a lot more about his feelings and motivations in Book 7, as regards others in general, not just how they relate to Snape. wynnleaf From april.minor at arkansas.gov Thu Feb 15 15:35:25 2007 From: april.minor at arkansas.gov (arminor75) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:35:25 -0000 Subject: Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Liv In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165022 > > Whirledgirl speculated: What if Petunia was adopted? > >va32h: > What Dumbledore says is that as long as Harry can call home the > place where his mother's blood dwells, Voldemort cannot harm him. > Those are Dumbledore's specific words "where your mother's blood". > Harry's protection is in his very blood - also Dumbledore's own > words. This is why Quirrell could not touch him without burning his > flesh. < < This is my first post. I hope I am doing it correctly. I agree that Petunia and Lily must share a blood tie for Harry's protection to work, but could they not be half sisters? I just cannot figure out why JKR was so "shockingly indiscreet" about saying Petunia wasn't a squib, but then so absolute that Petunia had never performed magic and never would. So it makes me wonder if Petunia didn't have a putative father (or mother) lurking around out there somewhere that was a wizard. Maybe that is why she despises magic so much...her father/mother left her, she got no magic abilities, and Lily, born of muggles, was a witch? Farfetched, I know, but I'm struggling here. April From happydogue at aol.com Thu Feb 15 17:51:48 2007 From: happydogue at aol.com (happydogue at aol.com) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 12:51:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia squib or not? WAS: Re: Random Questions from The Boy Who Liv In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <8C91F41195F1ACA-A10-1505@MBLK-M29.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165023 I don't seem anyone recalling half siblings. Same mom maybe but different dads? Same dads but different moms? ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Thu Feb 15 18:29:05 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:29:05 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165024 Alla: > Sectusemptra is not the best choice, sure I don't see why you say that, it seemed to work just fine. One of Harry's greatest strengths is that he seems to know instinctively what to do in a emergency situation when there is no time to think about it. Harry did precisely the right thing, and it's an injustice he was punished for it. >eviljunglechicken: > He [Harry] wants to hurt Draco because of their > history. [ ] he doesn't merely want to defend, > he wants to attack. Yes, but you almost make it sound like that's something you don't want to see in a literary hero. > I guess it's not strange that he would reach > for this curse as he has used crucio as well. Exactly, and I will be very surprised it he doesn't use it again in the last book. dumbledore11214 Wrote: > Does Draco deserve to be punished? Certainly According to the law he deserves to go to Azkaban for the rest of his life. >Does he deserve to die from it? Sorry, no If someone is shooting a gun at me the well being of my attacker would be the very last thing on my mind. All I'd be interested in is stopping him, and if that involved blowing his head off before he got a chance to blow off mine then so be it. I mean, would you really enjoy reading about the further adventures of Mr. Politically Correct? I don't understand why everybody is supercritical of every little thing Harry does but when Snape does things that are absolutely outrageous he gets a free pass. Eggplant From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 18:44:26 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:44:26 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165027 > > Alla: > > > > > I am sorry and no offense to you as well, but you keep calling it > > > unathorised dueling. I call it self defense and I do not remember > > > where in canon it says that student is forbidden to defend > > himself > > > from Unforgivable curse. > > wynnleaf > Whatever Harry *thought* he was doing, let's get a couple of things > straight. Alla: Um, if you say so :) Wynleaf: > 1. If Harry thought Sectumsempra was likely to be a powerful curse to > use on real-for-sure, dangerous and deadly enemies, then his recent > intention to use it on McClaggen when his back is turned was > absolutely horrible, showing all manner of evil intent. Alla: Yes. Wynleaf: > 2. If Harry thought Sectumsempra wasn't all that bad, and something > he could safely use on someone for whom he had mostly petty > irritations (McClaggen), then he was being rather stupid to use it to > defend against a crucio. Alla: Yes, and if you go back to my posts in this thread and some time ago you will see how many times I said that Harry was **stupid** for using Sectusemptra. This is the adjective that I agree is appropriate for him in that situation, I just will not agree to anything stronger than that. Wynnleaf: > So basically what this scene shows us about Harry is that he had this > Sectumsempra spell in his head, that he had no clue what it would do, > but he didn't think it any more nasty than a nail-growing hex. He > used it against Draco, not as some strategic tactic against an > unforgiveable, but because it was a spell he'd had on his mind. > > When the spell was obviously very deadly, Harry was shocked to the core. Alla: Yes again, who says anything about strategic tactics? I said it several times, this spell was not supposed to be in the Harry's head in the first place. > Alla > > And the truth is that Draco was firing Unforgivable curse and Harry > > was protecting himself. I am going to even go as far as I almost > > never go, hehe. I refuse to call it my opinion. I think it is a > > fact. Sorry. > > wynnleaf > Harry was "protecting" himself with a spell that he thought would be > fine to use on the irritating McClaggen when his back was turned. > That hopefully means that Harry thought the spell was pretty innocuous > -- which means he wasn't doing a very good intentional job of > "protecting" himself, was he? Alla: I am saying that Harry did not have much time to think through how to do the best job of protecting himself while on the floor, I am saying that he used the spell that he was thinking about for weeks and was marked for enemies. I think it is absolutely logical to use it against your enemy ( not the best, but logical instinctive choice, if this is not a contradiction), BUT I also think that it is not very good idea to use it when you do not know what it does, that's all. > Alla > > To make a long story short, I just refuse to accept that it was > > something **other** than self-defense. > > wynnleaf > Like I said -- you can't have it both ways. If Harry didn't know that > spell was so terrible, and instead thought it no different from the > rest of the Prince's hexes, then Harry had a wide array of other > choices of spells to choose from which he'd know could be as or more > effective against Draco. Alla: I am trying to have it both ways only in your interpretation of my argument, sorry. In my head it all very **one way** :) Hopefully I was clear enough this time, sorry if I was not. Harry had another spells, sure, who says anything contrary, but Sectusemptra was the closest to reach for, something that he was thinking about for the longest time, so it was the easiest one to fire in the stressful situation IMO. JMO, Alla > Alla: > > > Sectusemptra is not the best choice, sure Eggplant: > I don't see why you say that, it seemed to work just fine. One of > Harry's greatest strengths is that he seems to know instinctively what > to do in a emergency situation when there is no time to think about > it. Harry did precisely the right thing, and it's an injustice he was > punished for it. Alla: Heeee, I was talking only from POV of how poor Draco almost died. ;) And actually I was telling somebody offlist yesterday, that it is quite possible no matter how horrible Sectusemptra is ( and no I am not advocating that it should be used by Harry from now on), it is possible that while we do not see it and may never know that Sectusemptra was the correct choice, Harry instincts were right after all. JKR said as much that he is becoming instinctively good in DADA, maybe it does applies here. " dumbledore11214 Wrote: > > > Does Draco deserve to be punished? Certainly > > According to the law he deserves to go to Azkaban for the rest of his > life. > > >Does he deserve to die from it? Sorry, no" Eggplant: > If someone is shooting a gun at me the well being of my attacker would > be the very last thing on my mind. All I'd be interested in is > stopping him, and if that involved blowing his head off before he got > a chance to blow off mine then so be it. I mean, would you really > enjoy reading about the further adventures of Mr. Politically Correct? Alla: LOLOLOL. Eggplant, you quoted Sherry, not me. I am not sure if Draco deserves to die from it, but I certainly do **not** think that Harry's first concern should be life of Draco, but his own. Eggplant: > I don't understand why everybody is supercritical of every little > thing Harry does but when Snape does things that are absolutely > outrageous he gets a free pass. Alla: ;) From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 15 19:10:30 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:10:30 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165028 > wynnleaf > I have no problem addressing the issue of Harry actually > understanding that Sectumsempra really was a spell to be used on > *true* enemies -- people who really are a threat. > > But if we're going to do that, then we have to look seriously at > what that means for Harry to intend to use it on McLaggen. > > If Harry sees Sectumsempra as something at least as powerful as say, > Stupify, would he then consider it okay to stupify McLaggen? Is > this what JKR wants us to consider? > > I'm not sure exactly which way she wants us to view it. I think > it's somewhat ambiguous. But once again, it can't fall both ways. > If Harry really thought that spell was something you use against a > *real* threat, and yet was willing to use it on McLaggen, then Harry > is not by any means the "good guy" he'd like to consider himself. > > Of course, I tend to see some other past actions of Harry to be > extremely questionable, but at least most of those are against > people (Draco and Co.) that Harry at least really thinks support > Voldemort. But McLaggen is just an irritating guy who is causing > Harry a few headaches in the Quidditch and romance departments. So > this becomes a far more serious problem if Harry is willing to toss > out a spell at McLaggen that he truly considers in a different > realm -- that of spells for true enemies and dire threat. > When I said he used it because he had it on his mind, I didn't mean > that he was thinking of it in that immediate context, but that he'd > been considering its use for some time. > > If, as you say, Harry really didn't think of this as a spell for > annoying people, but truly for enemies, then why plan to use it on > McLaggan? And when his back is *turned* no less! > > I'm not disagreeing with you, Magpie. I'm just asking what you > think this really means about Harry. Magpie: Ah! I see what you mean now--and I agree completely. I think the key here is ambiguity, and the slipperiness of emotions and motivations and things like that. As confusing as it is, it nonetheless makes perfect sense as you're reading (or at least as I was) for Harry to go from regarding Sectumsempra as a sort of naughty thrill (something interesting in itself) that he can try out on McLaggen to something he uses at a desperate moment in a fight. There's also the nice ambiguity introduced by spells themselves, and the way they are often linked to emotion. Had Harry zapped McLaggen when his back was turned, he probably would have given him a vicious but possibly small cut, perhaps similar to the one James got in the Pensieve (whether or not one thinks Snape is using Sectumsempra in its final form there or not). He may have later seen that the cut didn't heal, perhaps, and then we would have to see if he came forward to help people try to cure it (as the Trio doesn't go to anyone with what they know about Montague's injuries). Part of what's intersting to me is that connection and development. Is JKR linking the kind of fun Harry indulges in with Snape's lighter hexes to the petty nastiness he seems to plan towards McLaggen (who is more an annoyance than an enemy) to going overboard in lashing out against a real enemy? I don't know that she'd have an easy explanation for one linking to another. I don't think she's writing Star Wars where Harry's being turned to the Dark Side or seduced to the Dark Side by teen!Snape. It seems more like a "submitted for your approval, make of it what you will" thing so far. Harry isn't completely comfortable with his own actions, but isn't analyzing why either. Nor does he analyze his feelings towards the Prince, before and after he knows he's Snape. Eggplant: If someone is shooting a gun at me the well being of my attacker would be the very last thing on my mind. All I'd be interested in is stopping him, and if that involved blowing his head off before he got a chance to blow off mine then so be it. I mean, would you really enjoy reading about the further adventures of Mr. Politically Correct? Magpie: Depends on the characterization of Mr. Politically Correct. But regardless, whether or not people would want Harry to not blow the head off somebody who was shooting a gun at him (which has never happened in canon) or whether they wish he had done something differently in this scene has nothing to do with it. I'm certainly glad Harry threw Sectumsempra in the bathroom. It was one of my favorite scenes in the book. Feeling righteous on Harry's behalf isn't the only way to enjoy the scene. I would have been a lot less interested in a Harry who thought to throw stupefy and walked out. I immensely enjoyed Draco getting ripped open--if for different reasons than you did. Eggplant: > I don't see why you say that, it seemed to work just fine. One of > Harry's greatest strengths is that he seems to know instinctively what > to do in a emergency situation when there is no time to think about > it. Harry did precisely the right thing, and it's an injustice he was > punished for it. Magpie: To be honest, it seems like when you use the word "justice" or "injustice" it almost always means that it meets your immediate desires in the scene. I mean, above you claim that according to "the law" Draco deserves to be in Azkaban for the rest of his life for, as I understood it in context, starting to throw a Crucio. Only that's untrue. People get thrown into Azkaban for casting them on people (so we hear--it's not actually ever happened in canon that I remember, and Harry certainly doesn't seem to worry about it). Since Draco never actually cast anything, "the law" doesn't have much to say about it. Yet I have a hard time believing you would be invoking the law against Harry when he himself tries to throw a Crucio at Bellatrix or Snape. It doesn't seem Wizarding Law is the real concern. Besides which, Harry is not punished for using Dark Magic or hurting Draco. Snape says he is a liar and a cheat and deserves detention all year. They're talking about the book at the point. Now, whether everyone would want to read about Harry not ever hurting anybody, I don't know. Harry does hurt people and people like him that way. But I think just as people would be bored by angel Harry who didn't ever commit violence, I think they would be equally bored by a Harry who moved through the story like an action figure controlled by a small boy, getting cheered by everyone as he knocks down anybody who makes him angry or opposes him with no consequences at all and calls it justice. Gary Stu heroes always have to be right (even if it seems like they're wrong it will turn out they were right) and all punishments inflicted on them are unjust. That's not always interesting to read about. -m From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 19:18:28 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:18:28 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165029 > >>Eggplant: > > I don't understand why everybody is supercritical of every little > thing Harry does but when Snape does things that are absolutely > outrageous he gets a free pass. Betsy Hp: Um... When has Snape ever gotten a free pass? One-liner, but I'm fairly curious about this. Betsy Hp From entangledhere at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 20:06:59 2007 From: entangledhere at yahoo.com (Sunny) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 12:06:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Draco's Personality (was:Re: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WA Message-ID: <618471.84254.qm@web51405.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165030 <> Avital, I just had to jump in and agree with you about Draco. He's my second favorite character after Harry, and I adore him. I think that you're right - he was raised to have this set of values and, in the end, it's not who he is. He's an only child, which means that there's a lot of pressure on him to live up to his father's wishes and reputation. But I think that he's not heartless, the way that a Death Eater needs to be. However, I think he's too weak in heart (and in his ideas of who he truly is) to be on the Order's side either. He's been told what he ought to be for so long that it will take him awhile to find out who and what he ACTUALLY is. So my view on Draco is that he's definitely not evil - he's just weak and confused and wonderful, hehe. I love complicated characters, and Jo is brilliant at creating them. I think that Snape is her greated invention, but Draco is certainly high up there. *Sunny* We are the music makers. We are the dreamers of the dreams. http://www.sunnychristian.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 20:45:57 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:45:57 -0000 Subject: Portraits - Additional: Actors Playing a Role In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165031 --- "justcarol67" wrote: > > bboyminn: > > > > Owlery2003, you are taking my 'actor' analogy too > > literally. ... No, the'actor ' metaphor simply > > illustrates how a portrait can portray a character > > with great depth, but still not be as fully realized > > as therepresented person. > > > > ... > > > Carol responds: > But the portrait isn't *portraying* the person. He's > an *imprint* of the person as the person was in life, > just as a ghost is a (stronger) imprint of the person's > now departed soul. bboyminn: You know I simply don't agree with the emphasis you are placing on the world 'imprint'. Why not fixate on 'Aura' instead? That said, while I agree with much of what you said, you still seem to be missing my central point. The 'Actor' Metaphor serves one purpose and one purpose only, and that is to illustrate how a Portraits can paradoxically be both deep and not deep at the same time. How it can so vividly portray the subject with stunning accuracy and yet fall apart when questioned at depth and in detail. The Portrait recreates the character, but does so within limitations; JKR has made this clear. So how can we model these limitation? How can we view them in a way that paradoxically illustrates great depth while at the same time clearly lacking in real depth. I choose to use an Actor Analogy because it does clearly illustrates a portrayal of great depth and feeling that at the same time falls short on details. > Carol: > > Nearly Headless Nick thinks, speaks, and acts exactly > as he did in life, except that his activities and > interests are more limited ... NHN isn't acting; he's > being himself to the degree that he can do so without > a physical body. ... > bboyminn: Nearly Headless Nick doesn't have to act because he really is HIM. He is not a representation of himself, he really is Nearly Headless Nick. He is REALLY the one and only person who ever lived, died, and returned as a ghost of himself. That is quite different that a man-made portrait. > Carol: > > The portraits,..., are much the same. They aren't > acting (pretending to be someone else). Their thoughts > and feelings are those of the person whose "imprint" > they are (Phineas Nigellus's grief for his > great-great-grandson is not feigned even though in life > he never knew that great-great-grandson), ... > bboyminn: No they aren't acting in the traditional sense, but they are following a 'script', just as the Sorting Hat is following a script. The Sorting Hat has a job, and performs amazingly well in that job; does so with great wit and intelligence. But, for the most part it is limited, limited to the job of the Sorting Hat. The 'script' that a portrait follows is that 'imprint' of the subject, but it has limited ability to go beyond its script. You use Phineas and his grieving for Sirius as an example, yet how would an actor act under the same circumstances? Just like Phineas I would say. Again, the 'actor' only illustrates the paradoxical depth of the character. None the less, Phineas is following his 'Phineas script' when he reacts to Sirius's death. In a sense, when we (living people) react to the death of a loved one, we are acting out a biological script. I hate to reduce grieving to that level, but there is an element of truth in it. > Carol: > > The portraits, ..., also speak and think for themselves > in something beyond the "catch phrases" that JKR credits > them with. In fact, that description is much more > applicable to Mrs. Black, Sir Cadogan, and possibly the > Fat Lady than it is to Phineas Nigellus--or, we can hope, > to Portrait!Dumbledore. > > Carol, bboyminn: I will agree if you change 'portraits' to 'Headmaster Portraits'. Headmaster portraits are more realized than general portraits because headmasters are so intimately connected to Hogwarts that they leave a faint AURA of themselves behind, and that Aura gives added intelligence and realization to the Head Portraits. I'm sure Dumbledore will have wisdom because that wisdom is in a sense part of his script; 'death is but the next great adventure', 'it is our choices who make us who we are', etc.... That wizdom still has the ability to come out, because in a sense it is superfical and philosophical. Portraits can do that. But when it comes to analyzing the details and reaching intelligent conclusions, I don't think portrait!Dumbledore will be much help. Yet, his philosophical observation, even if they don't seem so in the moment, I think can be of great help to Harry in the long run. In that sense, I think portrait Dumbledore will be of great value. I agree with most of what you said, except of the few details I have nitpicked here. Steve/bboyminn From megan.real at excite.com Thu Feb 15 21:09:16 2007 From: megan.real at excite.com (poohmeg20) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 21:09:16 -0000 Subject: Draco's Personality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165032 avitaldrucker writes: > > > > > Malfoy's not as bad as you think he is. He has come from the wrong > > > family and therefore tries to become a Death Eater (I think) in the 6th book, > > > but his heart's really not in it. Remember the part right before Dumbledore > > > dies when Malfoy lowers his wand a fraction of an inch? That shows that > > > Malfoy would probably go on the Order of the Phoenix's side if not for his parents > > > and the fact that Voldemort will kill him without hesitation if he does. > > > > Geoff wrote: > > Draco. Ah yes, Draco. I have in the past said that, speaking from my own > viewpoint as a Christian, I would agree with Sherrie that he is not > irredeemable. If there wasn't an opportunity of redemption for all of us, > then we would be in a sad state. Everyone has a chance unless they > deliberately and specifically refuse to take the offer. I also have to admit > that I have an irrational liking for him; don't ask me why because I can't > quantify it. > > As avitaldrucker says, Draco comes from the wrong family. He is an only > child, apparently with little contact with others outside Hogwarts, and > has had nothing but Death Eater propaganda and superiority pumped > into him. He has been denied the chance to really develop his own world > view. As a teacher, I can remember pupils who came from similar > backgrounds and who spouted the same discriminatory and closed mind > dogma. Hopefully, the events of HBP might have prised open the door of > his mind sufficiently to let a blast of down-to-earth common sense in. > Megan Responds: I agree that no one is beyond redemption - the question with Draco, however, is what he needs to be redeemed from. I don't think the wand lowering in HBP reflected a sudden realization of his innate goodness as much as cowardice. Throughout the books, he has demonstrated a lack of courage in any situation where he was left to his own devices, without the threat of his father's retribution to protect him, having to actually back up his talk. *In SS/PS, he was terrified to be in the forest looking for the unicorn killer with Harry, and ran off at the first sign of real danger. (ch. 15) *In CS, he is clearly afraid of having to compete on an even plane in quidditch and popularity with Harry during the school year, as evidenced by his repeated badgering of his father for a better broom before school starts. (ch. 4) *According to Fred and George in PoA, Draco was just as afraid of the dementors who came onto the train as Harry was, although he panicked instead of fainting; and he certainly was afraid of Buckbeak after being scratched. (ch. 6) He also was scared by Harry's disembodied head in Hogsmeade (ch. 14), and Hermione's slap across the face (ch. 15) *Throughout GoF and OOP, he continues to fear the creatures Hagrid brings to class. *In HBP, Draco is so terrified of his situation that he cries to Moaning Myrtle. And, most tellingly, throught all of the books he repeatedly accuses Harry of being afraid of various people, situations, etc. - I have always taken this as an attempt to draw attention away from his own fears. So, I think the wand lowering was a reflection of the knowledge that there would be no escape from his fear this time - he was on his own, and even if his father were there, he would not be able to protect him from LV. So if Draco comes over to the Order's side in DH, it will be either because of fear of LV and some belief that the order would offer more protection than his family or the DEs (more likely in my opinion since this isn't Draco's story and there's only one book left), or because he is somehow able to overcome his fears and make a fully realized decision on his own (which would take more time than I think is left, given his state at the end of HBP)...but either of those scenarios could also go the other way - staying with the DEs out of fear or coming to the realization that he really does want to be one of them. From jnoyl at aim.com Thu Feb 15 22:33:11 2007 From: jnoyl at aim.com (James Lyon) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:33:11 -0700 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... Message-ID: <6203D8A9-4AB2-436A-B41A-180049DCDD37@aim.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165033 Sherrie: If I was magical Professor X and saw Harry standing over a bleeding Draco, and knowing, as all teachers must that Draco has ALWAYS started things either with "fighting words" or actual unprovoked attacks, I would have both parties put their memories into a pensieve or administer a truth serum/potion. I WOULD NOT strike out and assume that Harry was the guilty party. This is just another example where Harry is shown injustice by adults who never seek truth. If I was anyone and came up to two parties, where one is bleeding, my first action is to get the injured party first aid. My second action is to find out what actually happened. As I remember, there was very little, if any, time spent finding out what happened and a lot of time blaming Harry. James Lyon From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 23:01:13 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 23:01:13 -0000 Subject: Draco's Personality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165034 > >>Megan: > I agree that no one is beyond redemption - the question with Draco, > however, is what he needs to be redeemed from. Betsy Hp: It's funny, but when I read this first sentence I thought you were going in an entirely different direction. For a very long time Draco fans said something very similar, only they were more pointing out that for the school villain, Draco hadn't really done anything bad. IOWs, there wasn't anything Draco needed redemption for. I do think HBP changed that. Draco actually put his wand where his mouth was and did his best to help the Heir of Slytherin. Only, it wasn't nearly as fun and fulfilling and glorifying as he'd always believed it to be. > >>Megan: > I don't think the wand lowering in HBP reflected a sudden > realization of his innate goodness as much as cowardice. Betsy Hp: And this is where I realized I'd pegged this post all wrong. It's the old, "too cowardly to kill a sick and helpless old man" argument, that I've frankly never understood. What's brave about killing an unarmed opponent? I do agree though that Draco wasn't embracing his "innate goodness". I don't think he was accepting or taking anything, rather he was rejecting the "evilness", if you will, of the Death Eater philosophy. Draco made a choice to *not* be a killer, but I don't think he made an active choice to become something else. I think he left the Tower in the middle of his crises of faith. > >>Megan: > Throughout the books, he has demonstrated a lack of courage in any > situation where he was left to his own devices, without the threat > of his father's retribution to protect him, having to actually back > up his talk. Betsy Hp: And see, what I've always liked about Draco was his tenacity. I'm not sure I'd link it to bravery (I think it's more stubborness than anything), but I've never really linked Draco to out and out cowardice. I wonder, were we (the readers) supposed to do so? > >>Megan: > *In SS/PS, he was terrified to be in the forest looking for the > unicorn killer with Harry, and ran off at the first sign of real > danger. (ch. 15) Betsy Hp: Hmm, but Harry was terrified when faced with the Unicorn killing creature too. It's just each boy's terror manifested in different ways. Draco fled and Harry froze. So I'm not sure we were supposed to get from this scene that Draco was a horrible coward. > >>Megan: > *In CS, he is clearly afraid of having to compete on an even plane > in quidditch and popularity with Harry during the school year, as > evidenced by his repeated badgering of his father for a better > broom before school starts. (ch. 4) Betsy Hp: Huh. Not how I read this scene at all. Draco wants a racing broom, he'd like it to be the best. And he certainly complaines about *famous* Harry Potter getting special treatment. "Malfoy bent down to examine a shelf full of skulls." "...everyone thinks he's so *smart*, wonderful *Potter* with his *scar* and his *broomstick*--" [SS scholastic paperback p.50] It doesn't strike me that Malfoy is *afraid* of facing Harry on the pitch without a good broom. It sounds more like he's bitching about the popular boy that only he, Malfoy, can see as not actually worthy of the attention. Jealousy? Sure. Fear? I don't see it. > >>Megan: > *According to Fred and George in PoA, Draco was just as afraid of > the dementors who came onto the train as Harry was, although he > panicked instead of fainting; Betsy Hp: Yes, and that certainly points to a measure of hypocrisy in Draco's mocking Harry for fainting. But it doesn't point Draco out as an exceptional coward. > >>Megan: > and he certainly was afraid of Buckbeak after being scratched. (ch. > 6) Betsy Hp: Scratches usually don't leave "blood blossoming" over robes and "blood splattered" on the grass. And they usually aren't described as a "long, deep gash". [PoA scholastic hardback p.118] I do think there's supposed to be a bit of humor in Draco yelling that he's been killed. But the entire CoMC class is left "shaken" and the entire CoMC class (expect for the Trio) distrust Hagrid's judgement after this. Again, Draco wasn't the only one scared in this scene. JKR makes sure he has an actual, bloody injury to yell about (yell, not shriek, interestingly enough). > >>Megan: > He also was scared by Harry's disembodied head in Hogsmeade (ch. > 14),... Betsy Hp: I reread this scene, and it's interesting because Crabbe and Goyle are the first ones described as scared, while Draco tries to figure out where the attack is coming from. Yes, Draco shouts and runs when Harry's head pops into being, so I'll assume that at that point he's been scared. But again, I don't think JKR is trying to set Draco up as a giant coward. Otherwise, wouldn't she have Draco be the first to be frightened? > >>Megan: > ...and Hermione's slap across the face (ch. 15) Betsy Hp: Actually, he's not. Draco is described physically ("Malfoy staggered.") when slapped, but he's not described as frightened or scared. Harry, Ron, Crabbe and Goyle are described as "flabbergasted", and then Crabbe and Goyle are "bewildered" when Hermione raises her wand against Draco. Once again, it's a physical description for Draco ("Malfoy stepped backward."), but we're not given an emotional descriptor for him. So again we have a scene where if JKR wanted to point Draco out as a coward she could easily have done so. But she chooses not to. (Actually, she's kind of ambiguous here. Why doesn't Draco get an emotional descriptor?) > >>Megan: > *Throughout GoF and OOP, he continues to fear the creatures Hagrid > brings to class. Betsy Hp: Considering the creatures Hagrid brings to class, I'd count that more towards Draco being intelligent rather than a coward. > >>Megan: > *In HBP, Draco is so terrified of his situation that he cries to > Moaning Myrtle. Betsy Hp: Draco was in a rather overwhelming position though, wouldn't you agree? Kill the most powerful wizard in the world or your family gets it. I'd be a tad weepy myself. And really, I think the tears weren't just fear-based. I think it must have been very hard to start realizing that the person you'd always pretended to be is not who you really are. Draco the junior Death Eater is realizing he's not really a Death Eater at heart. > >>Megan: > And, most tellingly, throught all of the books he repeatedly > accuses Harry of being afraid of various people, situations, etc. - > I have always taken this as an attempt to draw attention away from > his own fears. Betsy Hp: Does he? I don't recall this, do you have some scene you could share? Draco certainly *challenges* Harry every chance he gets. But I don't remember it as being always fear based. Wasn't it usually, "I know something you don't know"? > >>Megan: > > So if Draco comes over to the Order's side in DH, it will be either > because of fear of LV and some belief that the order would offer > more protection than his family or the DEs (more likely in my > opinion since this isn't Draco's story and there's only one book > left), or because he is somehow able to overcome his fears and make > a fully realized decision on his own (which would take more time > than I think is left, given his state at the end of HBP)...but > either of those scenarios could also go the other way - staying > with the DEs out of fear or coming to the realization that he > really does want to be one of them. Betsy Hp: I don't think Draco is going to back-track. JKR spent too much time getting Draco to a point where he realized what he *wasn't*, IMO. So I doubt Draco will decide he really is a killer after all and that the Tower scene (and all of HBP for that matter) was some sort of stress glitch. I do think JKR will give us a scene where Draco makes an active decision to *become* something else. I'm not sure it will entail becoming a full fledged member of the Order, but I do think it will mean working towards the destruction of Voldemort. And for that matter, most of the angst of making that sort of decision can occur off page. What will interest Harry is active proof of change which I think would only take a scene or two to establish. But I don't think the driving factor of Draco's personality is fear or cowardice. Betsy Hp From snapes_witch at yahoo.com Thu Feb 15 23:01:45 2007 From: snapes_witch at yahoo.com (Elizabeth Snape) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 23:01:45 -0000 Subject: The intellect of Krum In-Reply-To: <45CF51AC.2050308@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165035 > Geoff Bannister wrote: > > > Being from the UK helps. Many years ago, there was a very funny actress > > who appeared regularly on the radio called Hermione Gingold and was a > > leading character in the film "Gigi". > Ah yes, I remember her well. Snape's Witch From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 15 23:18:32 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 23:18:32 -0000 Subject: Draco's Personality/The Bathroom Scene Again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165036 > Megan Responds: > > I agree that no one is beyond redemption - the question with Draco, > however, is what he needs to be redeemed from. I don't think the > wand lowering in HBP reflected a sudden realization of his innate > goodness as much as cowardice. Throughout the books, he has > demonstrated a lack of courage in any situation where he was left to > his own devices, without the threat of his father's retribution to > protect him, having to actually back up his talk. Magpie: I don't think "innate goodness" is what it is either, but I don't think we're talking about cowardice either--Draco can't kill when he gets to the Tower, period, which means death for him. On one side he's got killing an innocent, helpless person, on the other people threatening to kill him if he doesn't do it. Is that supposed to be cowardly? If it's cowardice to not kill the person, that's a good kind of coward to be. You can kill and be a coward--just ask Peter Pettigrew who always makes choices based on his own survival. He'd have killed Dumbledore the second he got up to the Tower. When Dumbledore offers the alternative he goes over his position as not one of desperation, exactly. That's why it's potentially meaningful. He's not simply being given a hand-up, here. Dumbledore's trying to offer him a rational choice, one that he can choose because it does not involve leaving his family to die, which he is pushing himself to try to prevent (if ineffectively). Once the DEs come to the Tower the danger returns--not killing Dumbledore means that he will be killed himself. He specifically goes over the fact that he *doesn't have to* in his view. While it's not the same as choosing the right side, it is choosing against one idea he's been holding on to desperately. I'm not saying Draco is being brave or heroic, but I think "he's a coward" is trying to judge him on things that are not the issue. I would also add that Draco is not as dependent on his father in this way as he's so often described. Lucius is rarely any help to Draco whatsoever, and neither are Crabbe and Goyle. So while it's accurate to say that he often uses his father as a threat, I don't see his father backing him up. He does try to get Buckbeak killed, but I think that's something Lucius wants as well. Usually it's just Draco out there taking his lumps and dealing with the disappointment of the fact that he is out there on his own. Megan: > *In SS/PS, he was terrified to be in the forest looking for the > unicorn killer with Harry, and ran off at the first sign of real > danger. (ch. 15) Magpie: I'd have run off too. I think Harry might have as well if he hadn't been frozen in fear (much as Hermione was with the troll). No need for him to stick around, certainly! Megan: > *In CS, he is clearly afraid of having to compete on an even plane > in quidditch and popularity with Harry during the school year, as > evidenced by his repeated badgering of his father for a better broom > before school starts. (ch. 4) Magpie: Wanting to have a good broom for school is a bit of a stretch for cowardice. I think he just wants a good broom for its being a good broom. Also, not that it's a big deal, but what's with the "even plane?" It's not like Harry's on a broken school broom, here. Beginning in PoA Harry's actually on a better broom than everyone else, and while Draco certainly is terrified going into the championship, he does play. (His badgering is "repeated" either-- Lucius shuts him up quite effectively throughout the scene.) Megan: > *According to Fred and George in PoA, Draco was just as afraid of > the dementors who came onto the train as Harry was, although he > panicked instead of fainting; and he certainly was afraid of > Buckbeak after being scratched. (ch. 6) He also was scared by > Harry's disembodied head in Hogsmeade (ch. 14), and Hermione's slap > across the face (ch. 15) > *Throughout GoF and OOP, he continues to fear the creatures Hagrid > brings to class. > *In HBP, Draco is so terrified of his situation that he cries to > Moaning Myrtle. Magpie: Yes, he is definitely prone to screaming and running at times, I agree. Though I still think some of the things you draw in are a bit extreme. Draco is definitely jumpy--jumpier than most. But some of these things are a little off. He does run in the face of a dementor and Harry's head. I don't think he has any scenes with Buckbeak after he's rather seriously attacked (and I must say his dramatic "He's killed me!" seems less about cowardice and more about, well, being a big drama queen!), and he's not afraid of Hermione after she slaps him, iirc. (He is very jumpy about Fake! Moody after the Ferret bouncing.) He's jumpy in Hagrid's *class* after being attacked--and most of the kids are as well. He's not always falling apart, he's just always nervous about missing instructions (wise move!). And I think it's a bit strange to act like crying to Moaning Myrtle given the situation he's in in HBP is a sign of cowardice. You don't have to feel sorry for the kid, but he's being personally threatened by the real life boogeyman of his universe and still trying to hold it together while realizing everything he believed about who he needs to be might not be true. If he needs to let off some stress through tears I can't blame him. When he's finished he goes back to trying to deal with it (badly). Draco gets split open by Harry in HBP and seems to deal with it okay (as he also does the Ferret bouncing incident at the time, facing Moody defiantly). Megan:> > And, most tellingly, throught all of the books he repeatedly accuses > Harry of being afraid of various people, situations, etc. - I have > always taken this as an attempt to draw attention away from his own > fears. Magpie: I agree that usually when he's accusing other people of being afraid he's covering up his own fears. But in HBP he is forced to face a few fears of his own, and I don't see his wand lowering scene as being about just Draco being a coward. Why doesn't coward!Draco just go to Snape for help if he just wants to be protected? He is a scared person, but I think the story makes it clear he's not being simply motivated by fear throughout HBP. He is scared and that is one of the things he's reacting to, but there's more going on with that. Megan: > So, I think the wand lowering was a reflection of the knowledge that > there would be no escape from his fear this time - he was on his > own, and even if his father were there, he would not be able to > protect him from LV. So if Draco comes over to the Order's side in > DH, it will be either because of fear of LV and some belief that the > order would offer more protection than his family or the DEs (more > likely in my opinion since this isn't Draco's story and there's only > one book left), or because he is somehow able to overcome his fears > and make a fully realized decision on his own (which would take more > time than I think is left, given his state at the end of HBP)...but > either of those scenarios could also go the other way - staying with > the DEs out of fear or coming to the realization that he really does > want to be one of them. Magpie: I'm surprised you think the second possibility requires too much time, since it seems to me the point of HBP was getting Draco to the point where he could attempt to make a decision on his own (not that he necessarily will one way or the other). I just honestly don't think JKR is interested in one scaredy-cat pre-DE who takes himself out of the proceedings and goes into hiding. If she was I don't think she'd have just had Draco for the first time realize that there was another way, and then yank it away from him. I thought Dumbledore's talk with him on the Tower was very much about getting him able to make his own decision. He draws "comfort and courage" from Dumbledore's praise of his own abilities, things that he actually succeeded at. Draco can still be scared--it's a scary situation and he's not particularly brave. But he's already shown that however much of a scaredy-cat he may be, his priorities are not simply keeping himself alive at all costs. With something to be brave *for* he attempts to rise to the challenge and doesn't completely fail. Sherrie: If I was magical Professor X and saw Harry standing over a bleeding Draco, and knowing, as all teachers must that Draco has ALWAYS started things either with "fighting words" or actual unprovoked attacks, I would have both parties put their memories into a pensieve or administer a truth serum/potion. I WOULD NOT strike out and assume that Harry was the guilty party. This is just another example where Harry is shown injustice by adults who never seek truth. Magpie: Except it's not, because the idea that Harry's being accused of attacking Draco without provocation is *your issue*, it's not canon. The teachers in canon--including McGonagall who knows perfectly well what Malfoy is like, and that Harry has been known to lose his temper around him--are not asking Harry what his reasons were. There is actually not a lot of time spent blaming Harry at all. If McGonagall scolded him for using the particular spell he used, where's the indication that she's blaming him for not being provoked? -m From iam.kemper at gmail.com Fri Feb 16 00:27:16 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 16:27:16 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Portraits - Additional: Actors Playing a Role In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40702151627o23f1b270t96a508307315521f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165037 > > bboyminn: > > > > > > Owlery2003, you are taking my 'actor' analogy too > > > literally. ... No, the'actor ' metaphor simply > > > illustrates how a portrait can portray a character > > > with great depth, but still not be as fully realized > > > as therepresented person. > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > Carol responds: > > But the portrait isn't *portraying* the person. He's > > an *imprint* of the person as the person was in life, > > just as a ghost is a (stronger) imprint of the person's > > now departed soul. > > bboyminn: > > The 'Actor' > Metaphor serves one purpose and one purpose only, and > that is to illustrate how a Portraits can paradoxically > be both deep and not deep at the same time. How it can > so vividly portray the subject with stunning accuracy > and yet fall apart when questioned at depth and in > detail. > > The Portrait recreates the character, but does so > within limitations; JKR has made this clear. So how > can we model these limitation? How can we view them > in a way that paradoxically illustrates great depth > while at the same time clearly lacking in real > depth. I choose to use an Actor Analogy because it > does clearly illustrates a portrayal of great depth > and feeling that at the same time falls short on > details. > > > > > Carol: > > > > The portraits,..., are much the same. They aren't > > acting (pretending to be someone else). Their thoughts > > and feelings are those of the person whose "imprint" > > they are (Phineas Nigellus's grief for his > > great-great-grandson is not feigned even though in life > > he never knew that great-great-grandson), ... > > > > bboyminn: > > No they aren't acting in the traditional sense, but they > are following a 'script', just as the Sorting Hat is > following a script. ... > > The 'script' that a portrait follows is that 'imprint' > of the subject, but it has limited ability to go > beyond its script. > > You use Phineas and his grieving for Sirius as an > example, yet how would an actor act under the same > circumstances? Just like Phineas I would say. Again, > the 'actor' only illustrates the paradoxical depth > of the character. None the less, Phineas is following > his 'Phineas script' when he reacts to Sirius's death. > In a sense, when we (living people) react to the death > of a loved one, we are acting out a biological script. > I hate to reduce grieving to that level, but there is > an element of truth in it. > > ... > > Headmaster portraits are more realized than > general portraits because headmasters are so intimately > connected to Hogwarts that they leave a faint AURA of > themselves behind, and that Aura gives added intelligence > and realization to the Head Portraits. > > I'm sure Dumbledore will have wisdom because that wisdom > is in a sense part of his script; 'death is but the > next great adventure', 'it is our choices who make us > who we are', etc.... That wizdom still has the ability > to come out, because in a sense it is superfical and > philosophical. Portraits can do that. But when it comes > to analyzing the details and reaching intelligent > conclusions, I don't think portrait!Dumbledore will be > much help. Yet, his philosophical observation, even if > they don't seem so in the moment, I think can be of > great help to Harry in the long run. In that sense, I > think portrait Dumbledore will be of great value. > Kemper now: I didn't quite know how do edit the above... Steve, would Artificial Intelligence better describe your Actor analogy? Take for instance IBM's Deep Blue. It was a supercomputer in the mid/late 90's that played chess against the world champion, Kasparov. Kasparov beat Deep Blue in 96 in a six game series, but lost in 97. To prepare for the 97 match, IBM programmers studied Kasparov's other games to see his style of play. Kasparov said the computer played like intelligently and with creativity. Perhaps the HeadmasterPortraits are created similarly. The Headmaster Office listens and watches the Headmaster. While the Office doesn't know what the Headmaster thinks, the Office after decades of watching can anticipate and /program/ into the HeadmasterPortrait what the real Headmaster will most likely say. The longer a Headmaster is in Office, the more accurate the Portrait is likely to respond as the real Headmaster would. Maybe I'm babbling... Kemper From amyw at thephoenixrises.org Fri Feb 16 01:39:50 2007 From: amyw at thephoenixrises.org (Amy W.) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 01:39:50 -0000 Subject: Phoenix Rising - Price Jump and Ticket Sales on February 20 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165038 Dear Harry Potter for Grownups members, Do you have your registration for Phoenix Rising, a Harry Potter conference to be held May 17-21, 2007, in New Orleans? Our next price jump occurs at the end of February 19, 2007. Right now, a registration for the full five days of the conference costs $160. That includes admission to five days of programming and events, our Southern-style Overture Dinner, The Leaky Cauldron's live PotterCast, a full night of fan community celebration at Artists and Authors Night, a New Orleans-style Masquerade Ball, the Coda Breakfast, and an exclusive conference shirt. On February 20, 2007 ? as New Orleans revels in Mardi Gras ? the price will increase to $180. Also, starting on February 20, 2007, we'll be selling tickets to keynote presentations and special events (Storyville and professional Quidditch) to non-attendees. Attendees will be able to purchase any ticket for a non-attendee, or non-attendees can purchase them separately. We hope to sell out our events, as well as have an extremely popular Borders Riverside Quidditch Classic, so if you know someone unable to attend the conference, but who wants to hear a particular speaker, dance to wizard rock on Bourbon Street, or play Chaser for the Pontchartrain Pirates, they can do so as of February 20. Attendees are encouraged to purchase tickets before then, especially for Transformation: From Influence to Inspiration (fifteen tickets still available) and Transformation: From Fan to Fandom (forty tickets still available). Of course, even without any additional ticket purchases, your full registration provides you with access to a wide variety of Harry Potter programming, from the chance to leave your thoughts on our Final Theory Wall to participating in a roundtable discussion on immortality in Harry Potter, from a presentation analyzing the goblin financial monopoly to the opportunity to sit in on the panel titled "Snape: Friend or Foe?" that will be videocast by its sponsor, Borders, Inc. More presentations can be found at http://www.thephoenixrises.org/programming/accepted/. Finally, high school students living or going to school in New Orleans are invited to submit written or digital essays by March 1 for the Phoenix Rising Student Essay Challenge. Five teens and their chaperones will be awarded registrations to Phoenix Rising for their analyses of the cycles of life, death, and rebirth in the Harry Potter series. Complete information and rules can be found at http://www.thephoenixrises.org/newsroom/promotions.html . Please direct all questions to help at thephoenixrises.org. We hope to see many of you in New Orleans this spring! Cheers, Amy Phoenix Rising is not endorsed, sanctioned or any other way supported, directly or indirectly, by Warner Bros. Entertainment, the Harry Potter book publishers, or J. K. Rowling and her representatives. The conference is presented by Narrate Conferences, Inc, a non-profit organization focusing on education. Narrate Conferences, Inc. produces dynamic, innovative events for scholars, students, professionals and fans. Links: Phoenix Rising http://www.thephoenixrises.org >From Ash and Flame, the Official Newsletter of Phoenix Rising: http://www.thephoenixrises.org/newsroom/subscribe.html Narrate Conferences, Inc.: www.narrateconferences.org From stanner91 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 02:50:31 2007 From: stanner91 at yahoo.com (stanner91) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 02:50:31 -0000 Subject: Neville Longbotttom Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165039 I am sure this has been addressed before but does anyone else have the feeling that Neville will play a key, if not pivotal, role in the last book, ie Neville dies/kills Voldemort/saves Harry? Neville has come a long way since Philosopher's Stone, particularly in the last 2 books. He is more confident and certainly more skilled in magic. The fact that his character in the books has been more fleshed out is telling. stanner91 From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Fri Feb 16 05:27:28 2007 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:27:28 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: <6203D8A9-4AB2-436A-B41A-180049DCDD37@aim.com> References: <6203D8A9-4AB2-436A-B41A-180049DCDD37@aim.com> Message-ID: <8C91FA2486D646E-684-4252@FWM-D34.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165040 Sherrie: If I was magical Professor X and saw Harry standing over a bleeding Draco, and knowing, as all teachers must that Draco has ALWAYS started things either with "fighting words" or actual unprovoked attacks, I would have both parties put their memories into a pensieve or administer a truth serum/potion. I WOULD NOT strike out and assume that Harry was the guilty party. This is just another example where Harry is shown injustice by adults who never seek truth. If I was anyone and came up to two parties, where one is bleeding, my first action is to get the injured party first aid. My second action is to find out what actually happened. As I remember, there was very little, if any, time spent finding out what happened and a lot of time blaming Harry. James Lyon Oryomai: Well...can you just DO that to students? IIRC (and it's not movie poisoning), you can't use Veritaserum on a student. I think the Pensieve is the same idea. It's a complete and total violation of the students' right. I may be biased because I am currently a college student and I'm sick and tired of everyone assuming that I have no rights (sorry...tangent lol). The first course of action should've been to *question* both of them. If this did not produce sufficient results, they could *ask* the students to put the memory in a Pensieve! I do not like the idea of just immediately removing all the rights of the students before questioning is even attempted... Oryomai ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eviljunglechicken at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 01:15:34 2007 From: eviljunglechicken at yahoo.com (eviljunglechicken) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 01:15:34 -0000 Subject: Draco's Personality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165041 > Sherrie: > > I don't think he's irredeemable - I just don't LIKE him. > > For the record, I also don't like Ron Weasley or his brother > > Percy. Actually, some of the time I don't much like Harry. > > Don't much care for a lot of the kids - if I were a Hogwarts > > professor, I'd probably have a lot of Snapish attitudes, > > honestly. I had to laugh at this, because I also have to admit to finding a lot of the kids irksome at times and in many ways. > Geoff: > One of the things I always like about the Harry Potter books > is that there are many characters who display a variety of > attitudes and outlooks and are not stereotyped into `goodies' > or `baddies'. Unlike a lot of fiction, it's not the white hats > versus the black hats but distinguishing which shade of grey > hats the characters are wearing. :-) This is what I would like to believe as well, but I don't have your apparent confidence on the matter. > Geoff: > I have to admit that, although Dumbledore has vouched for Snape > in the past and he appears to be on the side of the angels, I > cannot stand the man. I wouldn't call myself Snape's greatest fan as many people on this list and other places are far more "fanatic" about him than I care to be, but I do feel he's one of the more interesting characters in canon. > Geoff: > As for Ron, I have occasional misgivings about him. There are > times when he lets his temper get the better of him and I > suspect that he can get very physical when annoyed. He also > can be quite jealous even of Harry ? perhaps especially of > Harry. Of the trio, it is Hermione who disturbs me the most. She has a ruthless streak coupled with the certainty that she is always right. Ron has had his major stumbling moment in regards his jealousy. It seems Hermione is due one as well. > Geoff: > Draco. I also have to admit that I have an irrational > liking for him; don't ask me why because I can't quantify it. I like him too. > Geoff: > Draco comes from the wrong family. He is an only child, > apparently with little contact with others outside Hogwarts, > and has had nothing but Death Eater propaganda and superiority > pumped into him. He has been denied the chance to really > develop his own world view. In a series where making choices has been heavily emphasized, I find the possible journey from darkness of characters like Snape, Draco, and Regulus more intriguing than the movement of those characters who started on the "right" side. (Now if one of those characters unexpectedly jumps to Voldemort's side??....but I don't expect to see that.) eviljunglechicken From dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 03:19:54 2007 From: dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com (dragonkeeper) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:19:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Neville Longbotttom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <211613.57264.qm@web53312.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165042 I wonder if he will find out about his parents at St Mungo's. I have to agree, Neville has been more sure of himself in the last two books. I think though his changing point was in the first book when he stood up Harry, Hermione, and Ron. Although he still some fears, he has been in there when he is needed and he does quite well with ladies. It would be something in Neville's future that was appointed professor for the Defense Against the Dark Arts. dragonkeeper From melissajhf at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 06:50:56 2007 From: melissajhf at yahoo.com (Melissa F) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 22:50:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville Longbotttom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <238115.18929.qm@web50811.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165043 stanner91 wrote: I am sure this has been addressed before but does anyone else have the feeling that Neville will play a key, if not pivotal, role in the last book, ie Neville dies/kills Voldemort/saves Harry? Neville has come a long way since Philosopher's Stone, particularly in the last 2 books. He is more confident and certainly more skilled in magic. The fact that his character in the books has been more fleshed out is telling. melissa: I also agree that Neville will be pivotal in DH. I have thought, since finding out the prophecy in OoP, that Neville still had the potential to be the one the prophecy was talking about. DD even says that Voldemort *made* the prophecy about Harry because he only heard part of it. I understand the series is HARRY POTTER, but I still anticipate a plot twist and what a twist it would be that really it is Neville who has to defeat LV. melissa f --------------------------------- We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From elfundeb at gmail.com Fri Feb 16 13:00:51 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 08:00:51 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lupin/ Father Figures In-Reply-To: References: <80f25c3a0702141923p60b55ae4lb183fd098a0eb739@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <80f25c3a0702160500o1a573386ya0a805263d175dc0@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165044 Carol: Lupin could have spared Harry that painful eavesdropping scene if he'd told Harry that Black was his godfather. Is his motive for secrecy the same as Mr. Weasley's, to keep Harry from going after Black, or self-protection, or both? He doesn't even tell Harry how he knows that the Marauder's Map is a Map--or how to work it--and Harry, who likes and trusts him, doesn't pursue the matter. Debbie: Oh, it's definitely self-protection. Sometimes, though, I wonder if Lupin has struggled with accepting that Sirius was the traitor at all, in spite of the evidence against him. As a result, it's much easier to accept the farfetched theory that Sirius was using black magic to enter the castle. Spotting Pettigrew on the map validated all his doubts. Pippin: But to be Dark presupposes that the choice is made for you. "Werewolves are so mistrusted by most of our kind" says Dumbledore. As you say, Lupin can't confess because his past actions would reflect badly on him. He thinks he can't be forgiven, even by his friends, for what he's done. He's internalized the view that his transgressions would show that he's a monster. Debbie: Werewolves are mistrusted by *most* wizards, not all. Dumbledore found him trustworthy. And just as he discovered that his friends at Hogwarts did not desert him after discovering he was a werewolf, Dumbledore did not dismiss him as a monster after he failed to reveal what he knew about Sirius in PoA (and, by extension, how he had betrayed Dumbledore's trust by running around with the Animagi). I think his real problem is not that he has internalized the view that he is a monster, but that because so much of the WW perceives him to be a monster, one misstep will result in the loss of all his privileges. This is only partially true. At the end of PoA, Lupin lost his job, but not Dumbledore's goodwill. In fact, Dumbledore stood up to Fudge and convinced him that Lupin hadn't been helping Sirius. I suspect Dumbledore would have stood up to the irate parents, too, but Lupin resigned first. Pippin: Would Fenrir admit to being evil? Or would he say that he has a right to revenge? Debbie: To borrow the words from another Voldemort supporter, "There is no good or evil, there is only power and those too weak to seek it." The WW has rejected Fenrir, and he in turn rejects the WW's laws and values. Or, to put it more bluntly, "F*** you, WW." But unlike Fenrir, Lupin hasn't rejected the moral code. He wants to belong to the side of good. Pippin: Sorry to be unclear. I meant that we've heard from quite a few DE's and none of them became Voldemort supporters because they wanted to join the forces of evil. Voldemort doesn't approach people by asking them to go against their consciences. He approaches by offering people what they want most, and as Dumbledore says, very often what we want most is bad for us. Lupin would realize that, he always realizes when he wants something that would be bad. But... Debbie: Most of them seem to have become Voldemort supporters for some combination of power, revenge or freedom to give full rein to blood thirst. I can't see that any of these would be attractive to Lupin. He wants the to be part of the *good* side, and thanks to Dumbledore, he is. He was a member of the Order in VWI, and he was called back the moment Voldemort returned. I just don't see what Voldemort has to offer. Pippin: Self-loathing can cause even the most tender conscience to lose its power. You can say Lupin would never join the DE's because his friends would hate him and he would hate himself ...but the trouble is, he hates himself already, and he thinks that if his friends understood what he was truly like, they'd hate him too. It's hard to lose your self-respect when you haven't got any. Debbie: But don't his friends already know what he's like? He's evidently repulsed by living among his *equals*, the werewolves. He knows he is not like them, although most of the WW would lump them together. And it's not like the Order isn't already populated with unsavoury characters. How about Mundungus Fletcher? Surely he's learned that one doesn't need to be perfect to be on the good side, especially now that Dumbledore has given *him* a second chance. Debbie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 13:10:16 2007 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 13:10:16 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165045 Sherrie: > Still - even if he were off-balance, as you state, Harry had other > options, short of that figurative shank. "Stupefy" should have come > more easily to his lips than a spell he'd only just read - and it's > easier to say quickly. Amiable Dorsai: I must say that I'm truly impressed by the number of people on this thread, who, when a split second decision has been thrust upon them, have, apparently, never said the wrong thing, never zigged when they should have zagged, never hit the brakes when they should have turned the wheel and who have always, even when a choice needed to be made in the time between "cru" and "io", weighed their options, consulted a lawyer, prayed for guidance, and made a cost-benefit analysis before acting. I congratulate you. Amiable Dorsai From va32h at comcast.net Fri Feb 16 13:38:34 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 13:38:34 -0000 Subject: Neville Longbotttom In-Reply-To: <211613.57264.qm@web53312.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165046 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, dragonkeeper wrote: > > I wonder if he will find out about his parents at St Mungo's. I > have to agree, Neville has been more sure of himself in the last > two books. I think though his changing point was in the first > book when he stood up Harry, Hermione, and Ron. > > Although he still some fears, he has been in there when he is > needed and he does quite well with ladies. > > It would be something in Neville's future that was appointed > professor for the Defense Against the Dark Arts. va32h: What do you mean by "find out about his parents"? He goes to visit them at St. Mungo's on a regular basis, as we see in OoTP. Based on his knowledge of and reaction to the Cruciatus Curse in GoF, I'm sure he knows why they are there. va32h From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Feb 16 13:53:45 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 13:53:45 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165047 Sherrie: > > Still - even if he were off-balance, as you state, Harry had other options, short of that figurative shank. "Stupefy" should have come more easily to his lips than a spell he'd only just read - and it's easier to say quickly. Amiable Dorsai: > I must say that I'm truly impressed by the number of people on this thread, who, when a split second decision has been thrust upon them, have, apparently, never said the wrong thing, never zigged when they should have zagged, never hit the brakes when they should have turned the wheel and who have always, even when a choice needed to be made in the time between "cru" and "io", weighed their options, consulted a lawyer, prayed for guidance, and made a cost-benefit analysis before acting. I congratulate you. Ceridwen: Thank you, AD! As I used to tell my kids, I'm perfect. ;) That didn't last long, even with innocent toddlers. But it was nice those few cumulative weeks it lasted! I agree with Alla that Harry used Sectum Sempra because it had been on his mind and was marked 'for enemies'. I also see merit in what Sherrie is saying, that Harry has taught defense himself and several other spells for use under duress should have presented themselves. He did use quite a few, if I recall correctly, and so did Draco, which was why the bathroom was in such a mess. The two boys seemed evenly matched. I also don't think that, because Draco was doing a task for LV, he would have been able to throw a properly working Cruciatus curse. He may have been, but he may not have been. If the tables had been turned and he did manage some pain for Harry, I think it might have appalled him, given where the story eventually went. As it is, Harry was the one to pull off a nasty curse, waving his wand violently and slashing Draco horribly. And, Harry was appalled. He didn't mean for something like that to happen. Someone (wynnleaf?) said that if Harry thought the curse was this bad, then he shouldn't have wanted to use it on McLaggen. If he didn't think it was this bad, then he should probably have reached for a different spell. I can see the logic in that. But I think something else happened in the bathroom that made Harry change his mind about what 'for enemies' really meant. Until then, the spells had been prank hexes. 'For enemies' didn't make much sense since Harry didn't know who the prince was. Enemies could mean other guys who are trying to steal your girlfriend or who would short-sheet your bed. I think that, when Harry and Draco were duelling, he twigged onto what the prince probably meant. Which doesn't mean that he suddenly realized he had a nasty curse at his disposal, but that the curse wouldn't be a joke curse like curling toenails or sticky tongues. There had been nothing so far to foreshadow such a serious curse written in the book. For all Harry knew, the curse could have knocked Draco into a wall, or broken Draco's wand. I do think Harry reassessed what 'for enemies' meant in the prince's context. So, I think Harry was between his zig and his zag, not meaning to use something so dark, but wanting to use a more serious (as in not a gag) spell 'for enemies'. Harry's big mistake was in waving his wand wildly, slashing Draco repeatedly. He didn't know. Who was it that asked about classical languages at Hogwarts? So far, we haven't seen any such classes that Harry's had to sit through, nor have we seen him doing homework for a Latin class. Since it seems that they don't teach Latin (why wouldn't they, when many of the spells use Latin?), then Harry, not being Hermione, wouldn't know what Sectum Sempra meant. Harry wasn't punished for using the spell. The spell he used gave Snape the information he needed to know where Harry was getting his Potions genius. He was punished for lying to a teacher. If his punishment had been for trying to disect a fellow student, I imagine it would have been a stricter punishment. At the least, helping Filch chisel gum from under desks. Ceridwen, who has made several zigs when she should have zagged, but who has never made a cost-benefit analysis since math is not her strong point. From mros at xs4all.nl Fri Feb 16 14:49:20 2007 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 15:49:20 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... References: Message-ID: <000901c751d9$a3f39070$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 165048 Amiable Dorsai: I must say that I'm truly impressed by the number of people on this thread, who, when a split second decision has been thrust upon them, have, apparently, never said the wrong thing, never zigged when they should have zagged, never hit the brakes when they should have turned the wheel and who have always, even when a choice needed to be made in the time between "cru" and "io", weighed their options, consulted a lawyer, prayed for guidance, and made a cost-benefit analysis before acting. Marion Alas, I have done many a stupid thing in my life, even without the excuse of it being done whilst making a split second decision, but then, I never nearly killed another person. Now, let's try to imagine this being so. I'm driving my car, and suddenly and unexpectedly, a kid jumps from behind some parked cars, right in front of my bumper. In the split second it takes to try to avoid the kid I hit the brakes instead of jerking my steering wheel and I ram straight into the kid. In this analogy, I'm not at fault. I don't hate the kid. I don't have a history of fighting this kid. I didn't follow this kid around, trying to proof he's doing evil deeds. I don't even know this kid. I don't secretly try out new ways to use my car to scare, annoy or hurt people. In this analogy, I'm a pure victim of circumstance. It's not my fault this kid ran in front of my wheels. Yet, the sound his body makes, bouncing off my windshield, will haunt me 'till my dying days. I will go, "OhgodohgodohgodIkilledhim" for quite some time, and even after the ambulance has taken him to hospital and it's confirmed that he will live, I'll still wake up in the night hearing that sickening 'bump', I'll still feel guilty and responsible, if only because of the two of us, I got away unscratched. I will, for days if not for months or even years, berate myself for not jerking my wheel instead of slamming the brakes. Harry used a spell on Draco which imitated being hacked a hundred times with a machete. Blood dripping from the bathroom mirrors, dripping off the ceiling, heck, dripping of Harry himself. Harry's initial reaction *is* one of shock, but within minutes he gets more afraid of losing his potions book than of the fact that he very nearly killed a fellow human being. No guilt. No "I should've used stupefy instead". No bad dreams, no nothing. Harry is deep in denial. Or he's just very good at dehumanizing Slytherins in general and Draco in particular. (It's bad to kill people with a slicing curse, *unless* it's Draco. Just as it's bad to bully kids four to one, dangling them upside down and take their underwear off, *unless* it's Draco) It's amazing, really, because we've been told that Draco was better at learning Occlumency because he was better at 'compartimentalising his mind'. I disagree. I think what one need to learn Occlumency is self discipline. 'Decompartimentalising' one's brain is something *Harry* is very good at. But I digress. Being in denial after just very nearly (and very messily) killing a kid is not so much what I fault Harry for. As you said, we all do stupid things sometimes. We all make bad decisions, especially when we're young (just ask Snape, Lucius or Regulus) I don't fault Harry for being in denial, but I don't condone it either. Making a bad mistake is one thing. Trying to act as if nothing ever happened is, well, cowardly. There are fans that claim that his being in denial 'makes him human'. As if taking responsibility for one's own actions is somehow *not* 'human'. It is human. It's also called 'being an adult', and at sixteen years old, Harry is rather late learning some of life's lessons. Especially since he's supposed to be the Hero of this story, the one who has to battle the Big Evil One. It's one thing to charge down a battlefield, wanting to fight the baddies. It's another kind of courage to look at yourself, aknowledge the fact that you do make mistakes. Neville, for instance, *grows* during the books. He arrived at school being afraid of his magic. Being afraid of people expecting great things of him. Better to be a dunce than to have all that pressure on you. Better to be a squib. Denial! Luckily for Neville, he had teachers that didn't let him get away with it. Neville *is* magical, so he'd better learn to use it. And lo and behold, after a few years we see Neville accepting his magic, accepting that he might be called upon to do great things, even if he doesn't necessarily *wish* to, he still goes and fight the baddies with great aplomb. As long as Harry refuses to take responsibility for his own mistakes and as long as he keeps blaming others for them ("it wasn't stupid and discrimitory of me to suspect Snape of wanting to steal the Philosopher's Stone just because I think he doesn't like me, Snape is still evil and I refuse to listen to him or learn from him because no matter what it takes, I'll proof that he's evil for not liking me", "it wasn't me stupidly rushing to the MoM that got Sirius killed, it wasn't Sirius' own rashness that got him killed, heck, it wasn't even Bellatrix curse that got Sirius killed - it was all SNAPE's fault!!", "it wasn't my decision to follow Draco around and spying on him that got us into a fight, it wasn't my throwing a slicing hex at him that got him into hospital, it was all Snape's fault for writing the hex in the first place!!"), in shorrt, as long as Harry refuses to aknowledge his mistakes, and - God forbid! - even *learn* from them, I can't see him as any kind of Hero at all. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 14:52:55 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 14:52:55 -0000 Subject: Draco's Personality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165049 Betsy Hp wrote: > Betsy Hp: > And this is where I realized I'd pegged this post all wrong. > It's the old, "too cowardly to kill a sick and helpless old man" > argument, that I've frankly never understood. What's brave about > killing an unarmed opponent? > I do agree though that Draco wasn't embracing his "innate goodness". > I don't think he was accepting or taking anything, rather he was > rejecting the "evilness", if you will, of the Death Eater > philosophy. Draco made a choice to *not* be a killer, but I don't > think he made an active choice to become something else. I think he > left the Tower in the middle of his crises of faith. > > Carol responds: I don't think it's a matter of courage or cowardice, exactly. Despite his own brush with death, which I don't think had an *immediate* effect in terms of what he was trying to do because he was still focused on the cabinet, he still thinks, as he rushes up to the tower and disarms Dumbledore, that killing the old Muggle lover will be easy. It's only when he's actually faced with murdering a weak, disarmed, obviously ill and helpless old man that he starts to realize what Dumbledore states for him later: Killing isn't as easy as the innocent think it is. He realizes that he doesn't *want* to kill DD. He may even be *afraid* to do it. That fear isn't cowardice; it's a natural fear of doing something terribly wrong. At the same time, he's terrified that he and his parents will be killed if he doesn't do it. I don't think he made a choice on the tower at all. Lowering the wand a "fraction" is not an emphatic refusal to do the Death Eater's will. It's simply a sign that he can't do what they want him to do. If it were a courageous, deliberate choice, he'd have tried to fight them, or at least said, "You'll have to kill me because I'm not going to do this." But, because he doesn't want to kill *or* be killed, and perhaps because his parents are involved, too, he simply lowers the wand so slightly that Harry isn't even sure of what he's seeing, and stands there "more irresolute than ever" until Snape comes. > Betsy Hp: > Draco was in a rather overwhelming position though, wouldn't you agree? Kill the most powerful wizard in the world or your family gets it. I'd be a tad weepy myself. And really, I think the tears weren't just fear-based. I think it must have been very hard to start realizing that the person you'd always pretended to be is> not who you really are. Draco the junior Death Eater is realizing he's not really a Death Eater at heart. > Carol: I've mostly agreed with you up to this point. Draco may not be the bravest kid at Hogwarts (and I don't think the detention in the Forbidden Forest was his greatest moment), but he's not the whimpering coward he's depicted as being in the films. He certainly has determination, and he's trying to do the job that the Dark Lord gave him. But he's feeling increasing pressure as the cabinet plan takes longer and longer, resorting to ill-judged substitutes (necklace and mead) until Snape puts an end to those "amateurish" tactics and he returns to his plan. By April, when we first hear about a boy crying in a bathroom, he's apparently receiving death threats, and by May, when Harry discovers him (certainly by early June, when he finally fixes the cabinet), the threats have escalated to cover his parents as well. He's crying in the bathroom because he's afraid of failing, afraid of being killed if he fails, but I see no indication that he's talking about anything other than fixing the cabinet and getting the DEs into Hogwarts. The part about killing the "stupid old man" hasn't kicked in yet. He's just trying to do something that seemed easy and clever when he first proposed it and now it seems to be beyond his skill, and the price of failure is death. No wonder he's distraught. But he doesn't yet know what he'll be facing when he actually tries to kill Dumbledore. He certainly doesn't show any remorse for what happened to "that Bell girl," and we don't know whether he even knows what happened to Ron or connects it with himself. When he sees Harry reflected in a mirror, Harry is still an enemy seeing him at a weak moment, and his instinct is to fight. He doesn't hesitate to attempt to use the Death Eater's weapon, Crucio, because in his mind, he's still a Death Eater, still trying desperately to fill his father's shoes. He's terrified of Voldemort, but he hasn't rejected him and all he stands for. And Harry Potter is Voldemort's enemy as well as his. But, after he finds himself lying in a pool of his own blood thanks to Sectumsempra, something changes. It's likely that he stops underestimating Harry though we don't hear about it. It's also likely that, on a subconscious level, he now understands what death is. On a conscious level, though, nothing has changed, and he goes back with renewed determination to his Vanishing Cabinet plan, celebrating with an excited whoop when he finally succeeds. It's a moment of triumph, a moment of anticipated glory. He brings in the Death Eaters (Fenrir Greyback and all) as planned, leads them to the tower entrance as planned so that Gibbon can send up the Dark Mark and Draco can run up to the tower, uses his Peruvian Darkness Powder as planned. The Order showing up provides a bit of a hitch, and Draco arrives on the tower without his backup, but he immediately disarms Dumbledore. And then, like Harry faced with killing Sirius Black in the Shrieking Shack, he finds that killing isn't as easy as he expected. Unlike Harry in PoA, he knows the Killing Curse, and he raises his wand and points it at Dumbledore's heart, but without the DEs behind him, he loses his nerve, and, as Dumbledore talks, the realization that he doesn't really want to do "the job" kicks in. The talk is comforting; he can put off doing it as long as they're talking. The "stupid old man" trusts Snape (doesn't he understand that Snape is just out to "steal [Draco's] glory"?) and he's offering mercy (doesn't he understand that Draco is holding the wand and he's the one in a position to offer mercy?), but he's also offering Draco a chance to talk about what he's done, a chance to get credit for his cleverness (even though his listener is going to die any minute, as soon as the DEs arrive and Draco gets up his nerve). And then the DEs arrive and he still can't do it. He finds himself revolted by Fenrir Greyback (it's one thing to use him to threaten Borkin, another to actually be on the tower with him after he's bitten and perhaps killed somebody with his horrible teeth). Maybe he remembers his own brush with death. And so, even with the DEs at his back, ordering him to kill Dumbledore, he can't say the words. He has not made up his mind to reject the Death Eaters, and he's still proud of his accomplishments (no one--not Dumbledore, not Snape, not Voldemort--thought he could get Death Eaters into Hogwarts and he's done it despite them all), but fixing a cabinet and leading the DEs to the tower is one thing; killing a sick, probably dying old man who's been talking to him all this time, understanding and appreciating what he's done, is quite another, and with every second that passes, it becames harder. I don't think that Draco will become a full-fledged Death Eater, but his moment of choice hasn't come. I think that Snape will continue to protect him, persuading Voldemort not to torture him because he did, after all, get the DEs into Hogwarts and make the murder of Dumbledore possible. Voldemort may even "forgive" Lucius and decide to give him a third chance. After all, he's short on competent Death Eaters, so another prison break seems like a necessary means of supplementing his army. That being the case, Draco will be faced with a choice: become a Death Eater for real (whether or not he has the Dark Mark now and I think he does) or turn against Voldemort, not because Draco rejects the pureblood supremacy ethic but because, as Dumbledore said, he's not a killer. Draco is ripe for the picking, and I anticipate a tug of war for his soul between Voldemort and secretly DDM!Snape, who, I predict, will subvert the pro-Voldemort loyalties of the entire Malfoy family--offpage, unfortunately. The only question is how. > Betsy Hp: > I don't think Draco is going to back-track. JKR spent too much time getting Draco to a point where he realized what he *wasn't*, IMO. So I doubt Draco will decide he really is a killer after all and that the Tower scene (and all of HBP for that matter) was some sort of stress glitch. > > I do think JKR will give us a scene where Draco makes an active decision to *become* something else. I'm not sure it will entail becoming a full fledged member of the Order, but I do think it will mean working towards the destruction of Voldemort. And for that matter, most of the angst of making that sort of decision can occur off page. What will interest Harry is active proof of change which I think would only take a scene or two to establish. > > But I don't think the driving factor of Draco's personality is fear or cowardice. Carol: Here, I agree with you. I just think that the realization that he wasn't a killer came much later than you think it did, right there in that climactic scene on the tower. Until then, he was torn between fear and the desire for "glory." His principles, his loyalty to Voldemort and his belief in his father's values, remained unchanged. Now that Voldemort has been unmasked as a merciless dictator as ready to murder his followers as his enemies and Draco himself has learned "what he isn't," I think that he will come around--not as a champion of the rights of Muggleborns, much less Muggles or house-elves, but at least as an enemy of Voldemort, a temporary ally of the people he believed were his enemies. But I don't think he can do it alone. Carol, wondering if CrabbenGoyle will go back to Hogwarts with Draco or follow him into exile From unicornspride at centurytel.net Fri Feb 16 15:23:10 2007 From: unicornspride at centurytel.net (Lana) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:23:10 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... References: <6203D8A9-4AB2-436A-B41A-180049DCDD37@aim.com> <8C91FA2486D646E-684-4252@FWM-D34.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <016301c751de$5e1f07f0$2f01a8c0@Lana> No: HPFGUIDX 165050 Oryomai: Well...can you just DO that to students? IIRC (and it's not movie poisoning), you can't use Veritaserum on a student. I think the Pensieve is the same idea. It's a complete and total violation of the students' right. I may be biased because I am currently a college student and I'm sick and tired of everyone assuming that I have no rights (sorry...tangent lol). The first course of action should've been to *question* both of them. If this did not produce sufficient results, they could *ask* the students to put the memory in a Pensieve! I do not like the idea of just immediately removing all the rights of the students before questioning is even attempted... Oryomai __________________________________________________________ Lana writes: In a situation like this, I think it goes above an ordinary situation where the students "privacy" rights are in effect. You have a student on the floor ripped apart and bleeding to death. Any normal person walking in on that is not going to be worrying about a students privacy.. LOL They are going to want to know what just happened. And will use any means possible to find out. I also think that on an ordinary level you shouldn't use veritaserum, but this again is not an ordinary situation. This is a life threatening, somone is going to die situation. Of course I agree that you should have a "questioning" period. And I am sure that Harry would have had no problem with that. I also think that if asked Harry would have given his thoughts over as well. But would Draco? Not hardly. He would stand the risk of them finding out his plan. Hugs, Lana . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.0/689 - Release Date: 2/15/2007 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 15:29:43 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 15:29:43 -0000 Subject: Neville Longbotttom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165051 stanner91 wrote: > > I am sure this has been addressed before but does anyone else have the feeling that Neville will play a key, if not pivotal, role in the last book, ie Neville dies/kills Voldemort/saves Harry? Neville has come a long way since Philosopher's Stone, particularly in the last 2 books. He is more confident and certainly more skilled in magic. The fact that his character in the books has been more fleshed out is telling. Carol responds: I agree that Neville has developed dramatically in the last few books. His courage, demonstrated from the very first book, has always been underestimated by everyone, including himself. He now has his own wand, the experience of confronting Death Eaters and surviving, and the respect of Harry Potter, who previously had dismissed him (along with Luna and Ginny) as the last person he'd want to take with him to the MoM. However, Neville is not the hero of the books, nor is he the Prophecy Boy. I don't think he'll kill Voldemort (destroying Voldemort is Harry's job, and if anyone is going to help him do it, it's probably Snape). I think that the experiences of the last two books have built Neville's self-confidence, and it's just possible that he learned more from Snape's DADA class than Harry did. (We don't see any confrontations between Snape and Neville in HBP--no cauldrons to melt in DADA class, and he's already learned some defensive spells from Harry that he can use as he tries to master nonverbal spell-casting.) At any rate, being Cruciod by Bellatrix in the MoM probably showed him what he really has to fear--not a sarcastic teacher who can't tolerate ineptitude but the Death Eaters who Cruciod his parents into insanity, and Bellatrix in particular. (If his Boggart hasn't turned into her, I'll be very surprised. And dressing her in his grandmother's clothes won't help him overcome that fear.) I will be surprised--and horrified--if Neville kills *anyone* in HBP. That's not what DADA is all about. I think he'll confront Bellatrix, defeat her, and show her mercy by choosing *not* to kill her--which is not the same as forgiving her or letting her go free. She deserves a life sentence in Azkaban as much as anyone in the books. At any rate, Bellatrix is Neville's nemesis as Voldemort is Harry's. So, yes, I predict that Neville will be a hero, making his old grandmother proud, but it will violate his character and the theme of mercy vs. revenge if he kills anyone. Carol, predicting that Neville will survive to become the Herbology instructor at Hogwarts after Sprout retires (or maybe she'll be conveniently killed off to make room for him) From fairwynn at hotmail.com Fri Feb 16 15:29:29 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 15:29:29 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: <016301c751de$5e1f07f0$2f01a8c0@Lana> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165052 > > Lana writes: > > In a situation like this, I think it goes above an ordinary situation where the students "privacy" rights are in effect. You have a student on the floor ripped apart and bleeding to death. Any normal person walking in on that is not going to be worrying about a students privacy.. LOL They are going to want to know what just happened. And will use any means possible to find out. > > I also think that on an ordinary level you shouldn't use veritaserum, but this again is not an ordinary situation. This is a life threatening, somone is going to die situation. > > Of course I agree that you should have a "questioning" period. And I am sure that Harry would have had no problem with that. I also think that if asked Harry would have given his thoughts over as well. But would Draco? Not hardly. He would stand the risk of them finding out his plan. wynnleaf I think in this case -- in the book -- JKR did not intend to suggest that there should have been any greater degree of extensive questioning. Harry didn't offer any excuses of it being self- defense, so there was no reason to search for evidence that it could have been self-defense. We know through Harry that McGonagall and the entire staff knew a good deal about the incident -- at least as far as the degree of injury to Draco and the use of Dark Magic -- because McGonagall said it did merit expulsion. However, there's no hints from anyone, including McGonagall who we can presume would stand up for her student, that a normal staff practice would be to hold some sort of further inquiry. So I think we have to assume, since all the staff knew about it, that it wasn't a normal practice to do further inquiry. Wynnleaf > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.0/689 - Release Date: 2/15/2007 > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Feb 16 16:21:39 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 16:21:39 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165053 "horridporrid03" wrote: > Um... When has Snape ever gotten a free pass? One-liner, but I'm > fairly curious about this. No offense but I find it rather difficult to believe you really don't know what I'm talking about. I don't think you need me to spell it out because a blind man in a dead drunk on a moonless night could see it. An excuse can always be found for Snape's outrageous behavior, but one can never be found for even the slightest infraction by Harry or Hermione. Remember the horror everybody felt when book 5 came out and Harry raised his voice at his friends once or twice, you'd think the poor boy was a war criminal. But when Snape . well, you get the idea. Historians love revisionism because it's the easiest way to make a name for yourself; try to show that the villain was really a hero and the hero was really a villain. But sometimes they take things to ridiculous levels. Eggplant From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Feb 16 17:26:48 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:26:48 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak! Message-ID: <29352725.1171646809160.JavaMail.root@mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165055 Bart: I have just started re-reading the series, to prepare for Book 7, and I noticed something in Book 1 that I had never noticed before. Dumbledore's "speech" at the beginning of the Hogwarts term, a few words, "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" seemed a bit strange. In particular, the word, "oddment" didn't quite seem to fit. Then I looked at the phrase, and saw that one could extract the name "Dumbledore" from the letters in the word. After doing so, I tossed the rest of the letters into an anagram generator, allowed for obscure words, and got, well, nothing useful, so far. I figured that it was unlikely that I was the first to notice this, so I checked the web, and, at least after half an hour or so of looking, could not find anything about this anagram possiblity. Has this ever been discussed here? Bart From eviljunglechicken at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 15:55:46 2007 From: eviljunglechicken at yahoo.com (eviljunglechicken) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 15:55:46 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: <016301c751de$5e1f07f0$2f01a8c0@Lana> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165057 Lana: > Of course I agree that you should have a "questioning" period. > And I am sure that Harry would have had no problem with that. I > also think that if asked Harry would have given his thoughts over > as well. But would Draco? Not hardly. He would stand the risk of > them finding out his plan. eviljunglechicken: Harry didn't give over the Halfblood Prince's book, going as far as to lie about it and hide it. Would he really be so eager to expose his taking credit for the remarkable innovations he's shown in potions which are not his work at all? Or risk admitting he considered using a fellow housemate as a human guinea pig for this particular curse which proved potentially fatal? I don't think either of the two boys wanted this matter looked into in any more detail. From Bridellwyn at gmail.com Fri Feb 16 16:22:36 2007 From: Bridellwyn at gmail.com (Bridellwyn Orr) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:22:36 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville Longbotttom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165058 > Carol responds: > I agree that Neville has developed dramatically in the last few > books. His courage, demonstrated from the very first book, has > always been underestimated by everyone, including himself. He now > has his own wand, the experience of confronting Death Eaters and > surviving, and the respect of Harry Potter, who previously had > dismissed him (along with Luna and Ginny) as the last person he'd > want to take with him to the MoM. What of Neville's similarities with Peter Pettigrew? The parallels between the two seem too many to be more than mere coincidence. I wonder if Rowling is going to have Neville betray Harry, or at least create some suspence by leaving the possibility open... Bridellwyn Orr From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Feb 16 17:35:37 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:35:37 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165059 > Amiable Dorsai: > I must say that I'm truly impressed by the number of people on this > thread, who, when a split second decision has been thrust upon them, > have, apparently, never said the wrong thing, never zigged when they > should have zagged, never hit the brakes when they should have turned > the wheel and who have always, even when a choice needed to be made in > the time between "cru" and "io", weighed their options, consulted a > lawyer, prayed for guidance, and made a cost-benefit analysis before > acting. > > I congratulate you. Magpie: I'm equally impressed with the tenacity that the issue keeps getting changed. The actual issue is, if you *did* say the wrong thing in a split second decision, would you be able to consider that you said the wrong thing? Or would you insist you must have done the right thing, or the best thing you could do, because you did it. Or can your actions not be spoken about at all because of what somebody else did or what the situation was? Because if Harry didn't make the best decision here you'd think it wouldn't be so shocking that anyone would actually say that. Rather than justifying Harry's decision at every turn and answering any disagreements anyone might have with those justifications with accusations that the person's expecting Harry to be perfect or has never made a mistake themselves--so let's get back to talking about how Harry is being unfairly treated again. I would guess many people who point out that Harry didn't *have to* use this spell and is somewhat responsible for casting it have probably made plenty of mistakes themselves and might even be thinking about them and identifying with Harry in that situation. I think Harry's longtime relationship with Draco, and his being drawn to the "for enemies" idea of the spell, and the power that he unleashed in himself without consciously wanting to are part of the story and Harry too. Harry doesn't always have to be the biggest victim in the scene. Lana: Of course I agree that you should have a "questioning" period. And I am sure that Harry would have had no problem with that. I also think that if asked Harry would have given his thoughts over as well. But would Draco? Not hardly. He would stand the risk of them finding out his plan. Magpie: Luckily, people in canon seem to hit on the idea anyway: Harry and Draco were fighting again and Draco got hurt. -m From Vexingconfection at aol.com Fri Feb 16 17:12:10 2007 From: Vexingconfection at aol.com (vexingconfection) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:12:10 -0000 Subject: Underage wizards Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165060 Why is only some magic used caught by the Ministry of Magic? Didn't Hermione practice a few spells? vexingconfection From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 17:59:11 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:59:11 -0000 Subject: Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak! In-Reply-To: <29352725.1171646809160.JavaMail.root@mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165061 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Bart: > I have just started re-reading the series, to prepare for Book 7, and I noticed something in Book 1 that I had never noticed before. Dumbledore's "speech" at the beginning of the Hogwarts term, a few words, "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" seemed a bit strange. In particular, the word, "oddment" didn't quite seem to fit. Then I looked at the phrase, and saw that one could extract the name "Dumbledore" from the letters in the word. After doing so, I tossed the rest of the letters into an anagram generator, allowed for obscure words, and got, well, nothing useful, so far. I figured that it was unlikely that I was the first to notice this, so I checked the web, and, at least after half an hour or so of looking, could not find anything about this anagram possiblity. > > Has this ever been discussed here? > > Bart > Carol responds: I think it's just an example of Dumbledore's (and JKR's) eccentric sense of humor, Dumbledore's literal interpretation of "a few words," all of which happen to be either odd or humorous in themselves. The Griffin door (Gryffindor) knocker, the textbook authors (e.g., Libatius Borage, Wilbert Slinkhard), placenames like Diagon Alley and Knockturn Alley all reflect that same delight in words, in and of themselves. It's interesting that Percy answers Harry's question, "Is he--a bit mad?" (Harry is reacting to DD's "few words") with "Mad? He's a genius! Best wizard in the world! But he is a bit mad, yes" (SS 123). So JKR, through Percy, is equating genius and madness, or, at least, genius and eccentricity, humorously illustrated through these four harmless and oddly whimsical words. Carol, wondering whether this eccentric side of Dumbledore is a mask he wears for the students or an essential component of his complicated essence From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 18:12:01 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:12:01 -0000 Subject: Neville Longbotttom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165063 > Bridellwyn Orr: > What of Neville's similarities with Peter Pettigrew? The parallels > between the two seem too many to be more than mere coincidence. zgirnius: Sorry, could you elaborate on the supposed parallels? I can't imagine two characters in canon who are less similar. > A sampling of Peter, PoA: > You sold Lily and James to Voldemort," said Black, who was shaking too. "Do you deny it?" > Pettigrew burst into tears. It was horrible to watch, like an oversized, balding baby, cowering on the floor. > "Sirius, Sirius, what could I have done? The Dark Lord... you have no idea... he has weapons you can't imagine.... I was scared, Sirius, I was never brave like you and Remus and James. I never meant it to happen.... He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named forced me --" > "DON'T LIE!" bellowed Black. "YOU'D BEEN PASSING INFORMATION TO HIM FOR A YEAR BEFORE LILY AND JAMES DIED! YOU WERE HIS SPY!" > "He -- he was taking over everywhere!" gasped Pettigrew. "Wh -- what was there to be gained by refusing him?" > "What was there to be gained by fighting the most evil wizard who has ever existed?" said Black, with a terrible fury in his face. "Only innocent lives, Peter!" > "You don't understand!" whined Pettigrew. "He would have killed me, Sirius!" zgirnius: Peter was so afraid of Voldemort that he spied for him, and betrayed his best friends, for a year, without ever even going to anyone for help. > And Neville, in OotP: > 'You are not in a position to bargain, Potter,' said Lucius Malfoy, his pale face flushed with pleasure. 'You see, there are ten of us and only one of you or hasn't Dumbledore ever taught you how to count?' > 'He's dot alone!' shouted a voice from above them. 'He's still god be!' zgirnius: Unlike the Marauders and Peter, Harry is not Neville's 'best friend' (Neville seems not to have close friends at school, he's the odd boy out in Gryffincor in his year). Yet he is willing to face adult Death Eaters at Harry's side to help out. > Neville, again, OotP: > 'No, no, no,' said Bellatrix. She looked transported, alive with excitement as she glanced at Harry, then back at Neville. 'No, let's see how long Longbottom lasts before he cracks like his parents unless Potter wants to give us the prophecy.' > 'DON'D GIB ID DO DEM!' roared Neville, who seemed beside himself, kicking and writhing as Bellatrix drew nearer to him and his captor, her wand raised. 'DON'D GIB ID DO DEM, HARRY!' > Bellatrix raised her wand. 'Crucio' zgirnius: And Neville quite sincerely tells Harry to let Bella torture him rather than give the Prophecy to Voldemort. Even though he knows exactly how that might end for him. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 18:17:53 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:17:53 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165064 BetsyHP wrote: > > > Um... When has Snape ever gotten a free pass? One-liner, but I'm fairly curious about this. > Eggplant responded: > No offense but I find it rather difficult to believe you really don't know what I'm talking about. I don't think you need me to spell it out because a blind man in a dead drunk on a moonless night could see it. An excuse can always be found for Snape's outrageous behavior, but one can never be found for even the slightest infraction by Harry or Hermione. Remember the horror everybody felt when book 5 came out and Harry raised his voice at his friends once or twice, you'd think the poor boy was a war criminal. But when Snape . well, you get the idea. Carol responds: Yes and no. I understand why you think as you do, but I also remember your very thought-provoking "Could I be wrong about Snape?" post. I was delighted to see that you realized that we weren't just blindly defending someone we didn't want to admit was evil, that there was indeed evidence in the text for Snape's loyalty to Dumbledore. Now, I realize that what we want to see colors our theories, but if that's all we see and all we look for, we won't get very far. No one is denying that Snape docks points unfairly or that his teaching methods could be improved upon. OTOH, we (I) do see, for example, an encyclopedic knowledge of Potions and DADA, a Dark Arts background that *enhances* his newly revealed abilities as a Healer, and a complex character whose motives are not necessarily what he states them to be in "Spinner's End." He's a whole lot more skilled and powerful than most readers thought, and he kills Dumbledore after an exchanged look and a plea, yet he saves Harry from a Crucio and passes up the opportunity to kill him. What motivates Snape and why Dumbledore trusts him have to be the most intriguing questions on this list for half the posters here. Or, to put it in more simplistic terms, how can he be a good guy when he's so mean to Harry? I think you've explored that possibility yourself and come to some interesting conclusions. Saying that Snape's putative abuse is not as bad as Umbridge's very real abuse is not giving Snape a free pass. It's simply stating that, mean and vindictive as his detentions are, they pale in comparison to Umbridge's sadism. As for our discussions of Harry, Hermione, Ron, the Weasley family, Lupin, Dumbledore, et al., criticizing the good guys is not the same as attacking them. They're not perfect or they wouldn't be interesting. If you don't make mistakes, you can't learn and grow. If we don't examine the characters honestly, admitting their imperfections even when we like them, we can't arrive at valid interpretations of the books and where they seem to be going. I love Dumbledore, but I don't think that he's perfect. I like Ron a lot, but I'm not going to pretend that he isn't overly concerned about money or that he doesn't have a tendency to become jealous. As for Harry, I care about him and want him to survive, but I really wish he would open his eyes and stop seeing what he wants to see, especially with regard to Snape, whom he blames, fairly or unfairly, for everything bad that happens. Saying that Harry used Sectumsempra unwisely is not the same as calling him a war criminal. Saying that he should have realized that Voldemort was baiting him rather than falling into his trap is simply stating a fact. His instincts *aren't* always sound (though they certainly served him well when he stabbed the diary with the Basilisk fang). Most of us on this list are trying to examine the books and characters objectively and to separate our likes and dislikes from that analysis. It doesn't always work (I don't think it's any secret that I don't care for the Marauders except for Lupin, about whom I have mixed feelings), but we do at least try to examine the evidence, ambiguous and incomplete as it sometimes is, before arriving at our tentative conclusions. No one, or almost no one, is calling Draco an innocent victim. No one at all is calling Harry a "war criminal." We're simply trying to figure out why they (and Snape and others) act as they do, why no one raises the question of self-defence with regard to the attempted Crucio and the all-too-successful Sectumsempra, etc. Why does Harry so quickly put the image of Draco lying in a pool of blood out of his mind? Will he end up blaming Snape for that, too, even though he defended the HBP for jotting down the spell when he didn't know who he was? Our discussions are a matter of intellectual curiosity, of trying to understand what makes the various characters tick. It's not about attacking Harry and Hermione and getting everyone else off the hook. And if you haven't seen defenses of Harry and Hermione in response to the criticisms of their behavior, perhaps you've been overlooking those particular posts. And if we're examining the question of who's right about Harry's use of the HBP's book, one or the other is going to be criticized because they're on opposite sides of that particular question. Carol, who hopes that HRH will learn from their mistakes and survive into the Epilogue, along with Neville and, yes, Severus Snape From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Fri Feb 16 18:17:10 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:17:10 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Underage wizards In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702161017o1c655bddr5020082853063e4b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165065 Why is only some magic used caught by the Ministry of Magic? Didn't Hermione practice a few spells? vexingconfection --------------------------------------------------- Jeremiah: This is addressed in HBP. In Wizarding households it is up to the parents to supervise their children since the MoM can't decipher which spells are cast by adults in the house or children in the house. In hoseholds where the child it Muggle-born the MoM monitors magical activity since there is/are only the child/children performing magic. I would assume that Hermione performed those spells on the Hogwarts Express. She was, mostlikely, only reading at home or practicing the words without using her wand and, therefore, not "performing" magic but "practicing" it. Hermione is a stickler for rules and knows when she is breaking them (like in Moaning Myrtle's bathroom making Polyjuice Potion. She most likely knew and could recite every single rule she was breaking). You questioin is totally valid and I'd wondered about it, too. I thought they must have put a homeing device on the wands or something... lol. But, that's the reason why Harry got in trouble for Dobby's magic at Privet Drive in PoA. the MoM can't tell that is was House Elf Magic and that means that the MoM knows there isn't anything in the Dursley's house that can make magic other than Harry. (I would assume. I'm sure it would be a totlly different story if Petunia had a House Elf and the MoM knew this, so Harry would never have been in trouble for Dobby's magic or his own magic when he blew up Aunt Marge, the horrible sow...). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From muellem at bc.edu Fri Feb 16 18:22:22 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:22:22 -0000 Subject: Neville Longbotttom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165066 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bridellwyn Orr" wrote: > > > > What of Neville's similarities with Peter Pettigrew? The parallels > between the two seem too many to be more than mere coincidence. I > wonder if Rowling is going to have Neville betray Harry, or at least > create some suspence by leaving the possibility open... > colebiancardi: quite frankly, what similarities? Other than Neville being round-faced, there aren't any. Neville isn't a hanger-on like Peter, Neville has courage to stand up to his friends(PS/SS), Neville isn't a suck-up like Peter was, and so on. In fact, Neville is very much his own person. Just because Peter & Neville both have round faces, doesn't mean there are similiarties. Neville's parents were both driven insane by DE's; Neville was supposed to be thought a squib for many years by his family; Peter seemed to have some talent early on, due to his wormtail persona. I never "got" any similarities between Neville & Peter - Harry, way back when, used to envision Peter as a Neville looking type - I believe it was in PoA, but other than that, I cannot see anything remotely tieing those 2 characters together. cole From jnferr at gmail.com Fri Feb 16 18:27:44 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:27:44 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Underage wizards In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702161017o1c655bddr5020082853063e4b@mail.gmail.com> References: <948bbb470702161017o1c655bddr5020082853063e4b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40702161027n613eca7etb4ab3338eac3f750@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165067 On 2/16/07, Jeremiah LaFleur wrote: > > Why is only some magic used caught by the Ministry of Magic? Didn't > Hermione practice a few spells? > > vexingconfection > --------------------------------------------------- > > Jeremiah: > > This is addressed in HBP. > > In Wizarding households it is up to the parents to supervise their > children > since the MoM can't decipher which spells are cast by adults in the house > or > children in the house. In hoseholds where the child it Muggle-born the MoM > monitors magical activity since there is/are only the child/children > performing magic. montims: also, I think the rules must be a bit different for the homes of muggleborn witches, as the muggle element is exposed to the reality of the WW without having their memories obliviated. I think it's true that Hermione wouldn't have broken any rules, but if she had tested her wand by performing something very elementary, like the leviosa spell, for example, that would probably have been ok. At least it was a legitimate spell, unlike the other magic she would have been performing inadvertantly before the age of 11... The MoM appears to be able to tell what spell was used straight away, not just that unspecified magic was used... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Feb 16 18:41:09 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:41:09 -0000 Subject: Lupin/ Father Figures In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0702160500o1a573386ya0a805263d175dc0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165068 > Debbie: > Werewolves are mistrusted by *most* wizards, not all. Dumbledore found him trustworthy. Pippin: I'm afraid that Lupin, like Harry, fears that Dumbledore trusts people because he refuses to see the evil in them, not because he's forgiven it. > > Pippin: > Would Fenrir admit to being evil? Or would he say that he has > a right to revenge? > > Debbie: > To borrow the words from another Voldemort supporter, "There is no good or evil, there is only power and those too weak to seek it." The WW hasrejected Fenrir, and he in turn rejects the WW's laws and values. Or, to > put it more bluntly, "F*** you, WW." Pippin: But one of the things Rowling shows us is that unless you're a psychopath or part of an angry mob, it's a lot easier to say "there is no good and evil" than to live by it. The Malfoy family is a very good illustration of that. Even Quirrell begged and pleaded not to be made to kill the second unicorn. He was already under the curse for killing the first one; it shouldn't have mattered. But it did. Fenrir may be a psychopath. But if he isn't, then I'm betting his moral code isn't so different from the rest of the WW's. They're not exactly into showing mercy towards their enemies or avoiding harm to innocent people. Plenty of them aren't anywhere near subscribing to Dumbledore's lofty principles of second chances, opening one's heart to strangers and regarding differences of habit and language as superficial. Lupin's tragedy, IMO, is that he has the compassion to feel the truth in Dumbledore's philosophy, but he's been too cowardly to embrace the loneliness that Dumbledore has had to endure, without friends or confidants, because of it. Debbie: > But unlike Fenrir, Lupin hasn't rejected the moral code. He wants to belong to the side of good. Pippin: Does he? He wants to be with people who like him. If they want to do things that are against his conscience and they don't share his guilty feelings about it -- what then? When has he ever had the guts to say, "I can't go along with this." > Debbie: > Most of them seem to have become Voldemort supporters for some combination of power, revenge or freedom to give full rein to blood thirst. I can't see that any of these would be attractive to Lupin. Pippin: Voldemort's accomplices all have their individual reasons. Quirrell wanted knowledge (a form of power), yes. But Ginny wanted a friend, Pettigrew wanted protection, Crouch Jr. wanted a father, Kreacher wanted a master who shared his values, Draco wanted to restore the family fortunes. The goblins, according to Lupin, will be tempted by their rights and their freedoms. Are you absolutely sure there's nothing on that list that Lupin would want? Debbie: He wants to be part of the *good* side, and thanks to Dumbledore, he is. Pippin: But when it's come down to a choice between what's good and what his friends want to do, Lupin has unfortunately always gone with the crowd. He needs to be part of a gang, and I'm not sure that Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs were there for him after Hogwarts. How could they have been? It would hardly have been practical to keep up the animagi outings once they were living apart. It would be nice to think so, and if they were all cozy right up to Peter's betrayal, than ESE!Lupin will sink like a stone to the bottom of the bay where so many listies think it belongs. But the canon so far is pointing the other way. > Debbie: > But don't his friends already know what he's like? He's evidently repulsed by living among his *equals*, the werewolves. He knows he is not like them although most of the WW would lump them together. Pippin: I'm afraid he sees that he *is* like them, although he doesn't want to be. But he thinks he's like them because they're monsters, when the truth is he's like them because they're human. Not the best sort of human, but neither is Umbridge. I got rather tired of Harry's 'chest monster' but I think it's there because JKR wants us to remember, when the time comes, that all of us can feel at times as if we have a monster inside us. But I'm afraid Lupin, when he felt the monster inside him, must have felt it was there because he was a werewolf, and as if all the horrible things he'd heard about werewolves must be true after all. I fear that like most of the WW, he's bought into the idea that an evil werewolf is qualitatively different than an evil human. Ie, unsavory humans are that way because they've made bad choices, but unsavory werewolves are bad because they're werewolves, and what can you expect? We all think it's a miracle that Harry never bought into the negative self-image the Dursleys tried to instill in him. But dare we think that lightning struck twice and Lupin was also immune to society's messages? Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 18:51:59 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:51:59 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165069 > Magpie: > I'm equally impressed with the tenacity that the issue keeps getting > changed. > > The actual issue is, if you *did* say the wrong thing in a split > second decision, would you be able to consider that you said the > wrong thing? Or would you insist you must have done the right thing, > or the best thing you could do, because you did it. Or can your > actions not be spoken about at all because of what somebody else did > or what the situation was? Because if Harry didn't make the best > decision here you'd think it wouldn't be so shocking that anyone > would actually say that. Alla: Um, I think you are changing it a bit as well, frankly. And I do not see anything wrong with it :) I thought that you were arguing that there is an element of intent in Harry using Sectusemptra, if you did, that is for me quite different from what you wrote in this paragraph. Because to realise and acknowledge that you chose the wrong spell is quite different from acknowledging that Harry wanted to hurt Draco in that scene. You see it ( intent I mean), I do not, I mean, I see him wanting to hurt to the extent of defending himself ( how else you can stop the attacker, except by hurting him?) But I do not see intent to hurt for the sake of hurt, if that makes sense. And I am still trying to figure out how is it wrong to argue self defense if it is to answer to people who argue that it was not self defense? It seems to be obvious for the canon characters, but the issue gets raised that it was not clear self defense, so it is not **my** issue, it is an objection against classifying this scene differently, that is all. Magpie: Rather than justifying Harry's decision at > every turn and answering any disagreements anyone might have with > those justifications with accusations that the person's expecting > Harry to be perfect or has never made a mistake themselves--so let's > get back to talking about how Harry is being unfairly treated again. > I would guess many people who point out that Harry didn't *have to* > use this spell and is somewhat responsible for casting it have > probably made plenty of mistakes themselves and might even be > thinking about them and identifying with Harry in that situation. Alla: And some people ( or me :)) point out that under circumstances Harry was in, he may not have chosen the best spell, but the mistake he made was still while acting in self-defense. I do not see **intent** in that scene at all, except as I said above the intent one would have to stop the attacker. You cannot do it by hugging him IMO. Magpie: > I think Harry's longtime relationship with Draco, and his being drawn > to the "for enemies" idea of the spell, and the power that he > unleashed in himself without consciously wanting to are part of the > story and Harry too. Harry doesn't always have to be the biggest > victim in the scene. Alla: No, Harry does not have to be the biggest victim in every scene and he was not, but he IMO absolutely could have been. But neither would I agree to Draco being the victim in this scene, except of his own actions. > Marion < BIG SNIP> >> As long as Harry refuses to take responsibility for his own mistakes and as long as he keeps blaming others for them "it wasn't my decision to follow Draco around and spying on him that got us into a fight, it wasn't my throwing a slicing hex at him that got him into hospital, it was all Snape's fault for writing the hex in the first place!!"), Alla: LOLOLOLOL. I find this kind of logic to be truly fascinating. So, what I hear you saying that it is all **Harry's fault** for walking in the bathroom and he should have expected to find Malfoy there and be greeted with unforgivable? Got it. Marion: in shorrt, as long as Harry refuses to aknowledge his mistakes, and - God forbid! - even *learn* from them, I can't see him as any kind of Hero at all. Alla: Well, as long as JKR sees him as hero, I am quite happy ;) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 19:23:23 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:23:23 -0000 Subject: Underage wizards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165070 --- "vexingconfection" wrote: > > Why is only some magic use caught by the Ministry of > Magic? Didn't Hermione practice a few spells? > > vexingconfection > bboyminn: I think the thing people are forgetting is that Harry is not an ordinary wizard. I suspect his situation at Privet Drive is monitored much more closely that the rest of the wizard world. I think the Ministry knows more than it is letting on I think they know, to some extent, the Prophecy; maybe not word-for-word, but Dumbledore has given them the gist of it. Consequently, they are aware that Harry is important to the wizard world and that he needs to be protected. Consequently, they are monitoring Privet Drive very closely. Note Madame Bone's own words at the hearing when Mrs. Figg tell him she lives in Little Whinging - ---- Quote - OotP, Am Ed, PB, pg 143 --- "Full name?" said Fudge loudly, .... "Arabella Doreen Figg," said Mrs. Figg in her quavery voice. "And who exactly are you?" said Fudge in a bored and lofy voice. "I'm a resident of Little Whinging, close to where Harry Potter lives," said Mrs. Figg. "We have no record of any witch or wizard living in Little Whinging othe that Harry Potter," said Madam Bones at once. "THAT SITUATION HAS ALWAYS BEEN CLOSELY MONITORED, given...given past events." - - - end quote - - - Given that an owl arrive almost immediately after the voilet pudding was smashed, it seems they are very closely monitoring, but that pudding scene also brings up a flaw. Yes, a spell was cast in front of a muggle, but it was cast by Dobby, not Harry. The Ministry knows WHAT but not WHO. All that confirms what JKR said, though I think Jeremiah's version is more paraphrased than literal. Note that Fred and George are deeply engage in magical inventions and they aren't caught or even warned. I that again that confirms the Ministry knows what but not who. Harry is a different case from Ron or Hermione. He is the one that the Dark Lord and his DE's are after. Considering the level of threat as measured by Dumbledore's protection on Privet Drive immediately after the the Godrics Hollow incident. Everyone must think the threat to Harry is very real and very likely, so they monitor Harry much more closely than they monitor the rest of the wizard world. If there is a surge of magic in the area of Privet Drive, they Ministry can be sure it is an attempt on Harry's life. Now, I anticipate the objection, but The Rescue Squad headed by Remus and Mad-Eye performed magic at Privet Drive, why didn't that bring a warning or a squad of Auror's to Harry's place? Mr. Weasley when he picked Harry up for the Quiddicth World Cup, performed magic, why didn't that cause problems. Well, in Mr. Weasley's case, he had the Dursley's fireplace hooked up to the Floo Network. That means the Ministry was aware of his actions, and knew he was going to pick up Harry. Though, I don't think any details were given out, I think Dumbledore may have warned the Ministry, or perhaps just the people who monitor magic, that he was going to pick up Harry sometime soon. So, they wouldn't have been concerned about magic occurring there at that time. That brings up the question whether the Minstry can distinguish between underage magic and adult magic. It is not clear, but I think the /most/ evidence indicates that they can not. Also, keep in mind that Fred and George performing magic in the secure and secluded area of the Burrow, is quite different than Harry performing magic on his muggle Aunt Marge or in front of muggle house guests. Underage magic in a magically secure space would be a very minor infraction. Magic in front of Muggles, would be a very major infraction. Hermione practicing magic in the confines of her bedroom would have been an extremely minor infraction since her parents at that time are aware of the magical world. There is no breach of the Statue of Secrecy, only of the Restriction of Underage Magic and by a PRE-Hogwarts individual. I think the Ministry would let such a minor event slide, especially when it required no damage control. That is, the obliviator squads or the accidental magic reversal squad did not have to be called out to deal with any problems. So, a very minor infraction. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 19:33:14 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:33:14 -0000 Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165071 > >>Amiable Dorsai: > I must say that I'm truly impressed by the number of people on this > thread, who, when a split second decision has been thrust upon them, > have, apparently, never said the wrong thing, never zigged when they > should have zagged, never hit the brakes when they should have turned > the wheel and who have always, even when a choice needed to be made in > the time between "cru" and "io", weighed their options, consulted a > lawyer, prayed for guidance, and made a cost-benefit analysis before > acting. > I congratulate you. Betsy Hp: Ahh, this old straw man. It's a very familiar ploy, and is the converse, I think, of this particular straw man, Eggplant raised the other day: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165024 > >>Eggplant: > > I don't understand why everybody is supercritical of every little > thing Harry does but when Snape does things that are absolutely > outrageous he gets a free pass. Betsy Hp: And I think the answer to both Amible Dorsai's need for everyone to see that the good guys aren't perfectly white (was anyone trying to make that argument?) and Eggplants suggestion that anyone who sees something less than total black in a "bad guy" is somehow a "free pass" is answered by Geoff here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165007 > >>Geoff: > One of the things I always like about the Harry Potter books is that > there are many characters who display a variety of attitudes and > outlooks and are not stereotyped into `goodies' or `baddies'. Unlike > a lot of fiction, it's not the white hats versus the black hats but > distinguishing which shade of grey hats the characters are > wearing. :-) > Betsy Hp: Most of the characters are gray. Hermione is a "good guy" and on the right side of things, but she's not pure as the driven snow. Draco is a "bad guy" and on the wrong side of things, but he's not black as deepest coal. And of course with Snape we can't even be sure what side he's actually on!* He's the very definition of gray. Any interpertations of character that insist on making every decision Hermione makes absolutely correct are going to founder. Just as any attempts to force Draco into a purely negative mold are going to founder. JKR won't allow it, bless her. Is Harry perfect? Thank goodness, he's not. Which means we can (and should, I think) question his decisions and actions. Not only is it fun (for those of us who enjoy this sort of philosophical wrangling) but I expect it's what JKR *wants* us to do. She could easily have written the Weasleys as the most perfect family that ever engaged in group hugs; Harry as the golden-ist golden boy who ever gleamed; Draco as the most spoiled little coward who ever shivered in the corner. She didn't. To suggest that questioning Harry is something only sanctimoniuos asshats engage in, or that supporting DDM!Snape somehow means carte blanche acceptence of all of Snape's behavior is, IMO, an attempt to hide the ball. Or at the very least, stuff JKR's world into a color scheme she just hasn't written. *Um, of course, I *am* quite certain that Snape is DDM. Betsy Hp From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Fri Feb 16 19:40:31 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:40:31 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165072 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > Carol responds: > But the original poster was arguing that Merope deliberately passed > her powers to Lily. Once she realized that Merope died some > thirty-five years before Lily was born, she changed the speculation to > passing the powers to Lily's mother. You seem to agree that Merope > could not have passed her powers to Lily's mother because, as we know > from canon and interviews, Lily's mother was a Muggle. Ken: You do understand that I am changing the original poster's idea somewhat, don't you? I find the idea has some charm to it. You and I both agree that Merope did not pass her powers to Lily's mother because, as you say, Lily's mother was not a witch. But could there have been something else passed? The seed of magical power that germinated in Lily? We don't know why Muggles sometimes have magical offspring. It is quite likely that this is because it is unimportant and the author wants us to assume it is a mutation or perhaps a dormant gene that can be expressed under the right conditions. But certainly it is possible that the reason is something she is saving to reveal in the last book. I don't yet have the rigid view of the Potterverse that some of you seem to have. I expect the final few pieces to fall into place in DH and until then it remains a quantum-mechanical kitty for me. Neither dead nor alive, both dead and alive. As a result I don't exclude as many possibilities as you do. What we "know" seems less certain to me than it appears to seem to you. > Carol: > > You mentioned genetics (hair color). A gene for black hair is > dominant, Ken: That's all we need to know, as I said I was not sure if black hair was dominant. If that is the *only* resemblance that Tom saw between the two then that cannot indicate a link between Merope and Lily, I agree. > Carol: > > The powers that Harry acquired from Voldemort were acquired under very > special circumstances involving sacrificial love magic which caused an > AK to be deflected onto a wizard who could not be killed because his > soul was anchored to earth by Horcruxes. Merope Gaunt, who may have > lost her powers or simply stopped using them, died in childbirth. Her > own child was born with powers exponentially greater than hers, as if > Salazar Slytherin's own powers (other than Parseltongue) had skipped > fifty generations and accumulated in him. So if her powers went > anywhere, they must have gone into him, which would make much more > sense than giving them away to some unknown Muggle. > Ken: The literary analyst sees an exception and then strictly limits the application of that exception to a single instance, because that is CANON. The scientist sees an exception and immediately wonders if there could be more, where she would look for them, and what they might tell her about the Potterverse that the creator might be trying to hide. The scientist agrees that if canon were complete the system would be a closed system and the only things that could be known about it would be found in CANON. But since canon has yet to become CANON, the possibilities for the future are intriguing, for those willing to consider them. It is interesting to this scientist, in the light of this discussion, that the sorting hat saw something of Slytherin in young Harry. It is true that the obvious reason is the powers that were transferred to the boy who lives. Likewise the wand that chose Harry was the brother of the one that chose Tom. That has the same obvious explanation. Too obvious perhaps? Are wands and the sorting hat so easily fooled? Maybe they are but there is no harm in considering a Potterverse where they are not. We do not need to consider that Merope "chose" to do anything of the sort in her final days. There likely was no choosing involved if the idea has any merit. It could have been just a random accident quite beyond her control, possibly it happened at her death. These things appear to be quite mysterious after all. Tom get his power from Merope? Certainly not directly, and he certainly did not get his intellect from any recent Gaunt! Whatever gave Tom his unusual ability might never be explained. It would be quite ironic if the true source of his power (but not his Slytherin connection of course) came from a latent magical streak in the Riddles. It seems nearly certain that he owes them his intelligence. We don't know enough to assert or refute dictums on why Lily was a witch or why Tom was so powerful. All we can do is float theories and wait to watch them sink, swim, or drift from view in DH. > Carol: > If JKR wanted us to suspect that Merope had given away her powers to a > Muggle girl (and Lily's mother must have been very young at the time), > the girl would have been mentioned. Ken: And if she didn't want us to suspect? Does an author have to telegraph *everything* to be respectable? I don't think so. > > Carol, who can see no point in this particular bit of speculation even > if it could hold up to canonical scrutiny > Ken: The first step towards finding the point is the willingness to consider the possibility. What could a link of some kind between Tom and Harry mean? I confess that I do not know. How can you claim that it means nothing when you are unwilling to consider the possibility? Why is it that Tom seems to have no good side, seems never to have had one? Why *did* he choose Harry instead of Neville? Is is *possible* that there is a deeper link between them that no one has suspected yet? Maybe it goes nowhere, yet there seems to be material here to while away a few hours on. Ken From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Fri Feb 16 19:48:04 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 11:48:04 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Underage wizards In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702161148pc9dab5l59bfe45950fddbc@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165073 Also, keep in mind that Fred and George performing magic in the secure and secluded area of the Burrow, is quite different than Harry performing magic on his muggle Aunt Marge or in front of muggle house guests. Underage magic in a magically secure space would be a very minor infraction. Magic in front of Muggles, would be a very major infraction. Hermione practicing magic in the confines of her bedroom would have been an extremely minor infraction since her parents at that time are aware of the magical world. There is no breach of the Statue of Secrecy, only of the Restriction of Underage Magic and by a PRE-Hogwarts individual. I think the Ministry would let such a minor event slide, especially when it required no damage control. That is, the obliviator squads or the accidental magic reversal squad did not have to be called out to deal with any problems. So, a very minor infraction. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn ================== Jeremiah: I agree that Harry's residence was very closely monitored. I don't think there was really a question about that. And, thanks for the exact quote. DD always said Harry was more closely monitored than Harry probably ever knew. I also agree that if Hermione did a little magic in her house it would have been overlooked by the MoM. Althoug, if she did a lot of stuff before Hogwarts I would think they'd have sent an owl asking her to knock it off. You know, just in case anyone happened to wander by an open window or something... But probably a monir infraction as bboyminn says. But, as I was saying before, in HBP it is said that underage wizards in magical households are monitored by their parents. Fred and George, mostlikely using a majority of potions and a few charms here and there, the ministry isn't really going to notice their antice becasue Molly and aurther are supposed to be taking care of that. plus, Aurther, working for the ministry, would know they aren't being monitord and the boys probably know a bit about that. That's how I see it. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 19:50:41 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:50:41 -0000 Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book/Free passes to characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165074 > "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > Um... When has Snape ever gotten a free pass? One-liner, but I'm > > fairly curious about this. Eggplant: > No offense but I find it rather difficult to believe you really don't > know what I'm talking about. I don't think you need me to spell it out > because a blind man in a dead drunk on a moonless night could see it. > An excuse can always be found for Snape's outrageous behavior, but one > can never be found for even the slightest infraction by Harry or > Hermione. Remember the horror everybody felt when book 5 came out and > Harry raised his voice at his friends once or twice, you'd think the > poor boy was a war criminal. But when Snape . well, you get the idea. Alla: Hmmm, I partially agree with you. In a sense that I do not advocate giving the good guys free pass, hehe. I certainly am not going to give Dumbledore free pass for example for many of his transgressions as I see them, but I do not think he is evil or anything like that, just very flawed. It is fun to debate good guys mistakes, so I do not see why anybody should be deprived of such fun. It is not like I will be convinced if I do not see it as mistake, hehe. But what I agree with you is that the amount of scrutiny of good guys is much higher than the character you mentioned. And again, I deeply respect everybody's rights to point out characters ethical mistakes, **every** character mistake, but I do find it amusing when Snape is given free pass for everything starting from his teaching tactics and ending up with murder. IMO of course. Oh and I of course realize that I am making the sweeping generalization, but this is the general impression I get ( not everybody excuses Snape of course). And that is again, their right, but it is also my right to call it an excuse or justification and not a theory supported by canon. For example, if one says that Harry and Snape are **equally** responsible for the hatred they feel for each other, I am not calling it anything else but **excuse**, because the text for me talks about eleven year old thrown in the new world and his lovely teacher attacks him on the very first lesson. Basically any justification of what Snape does to Trio reads to me as an excuse. Snape's loyalties, well, sure, there are things in the text where it can be argued that something else is happening, so at least with DD!M Snape I will not call it an excuse, but even in that situation blaming Dumbledore for the fact that Snape murdered him reads to me as another excuse of Snape's actions. Saying that Snape just had to save himself from UV (which **he** himself took and nobody forced him into, it seems) , reads to me as another excuse. And not that I do not do it myself. For example, to go back to Harry's using Unforgivables. As I mentioned in another thread, I honestly do not see **any** sign of intent on Harry behalf, except to defend himself in bathroom scene, but I was always surprised why JKR said that Harry did not have an intent to complete Crucio in OOP. I guess it goes back to what I consider her being very unclear on Dark magic in general and the unforgivables as well ( what kind of intent is needed, etc), but I always thought that Harry had plenty of intent to hurt Bella. And I thought that he could have ended up in Azkaban for that. Having said that, I absolutely excuse Harry here because of the pain he was in, etc. It does not mean though that I would call his action right, not at all. I am not going to say that there is any sound reason for him to do so, except the pain he was in, but this **is** an excuse. > Betsy Hp: > Most of the characters are gray. Hermione is a "good guy" and on the > right side of things, but she's not pure as the driven snow. Draco is > a "bad guy" and on the wrong side of things, but he's not black as > deepest coal. And of course with Snape we can't even be sure what side > he's actually on!* He's the very definition of gray. Alla: Are they though? Sure, there is greyness in every character. But to compare greyness in say Ron and Snape? I would say that Snape is much much closer to the **black** and Ron is of much ligter grey colour. And as I said I am all for questioning **every** character's actions, Harry included. I am just thinking that a little equality would be nice :) Not a requirement mind you, but I do agree with Eggplant that Snape is not scrutinised as much as everybody else **at all*. Betsy: > Any interpertations of character that insist on making every decision > Hermione makes absolutely correct are going to founder. Just as any > attempts to force Draco into a purely negative mold are going to > founder. JKR won't allow it, bless her. Alla: But interpretations that make Hermione a potential Umbridge and Draco, let's see a victim of Harry's spying ( after all, that is the reason that Draco attacked him with Crucio ) are amusing. Betsy: > Is Harry perfect? Thank goodness, he's not. Which means we can (and > should, I think) question his decisions and actions. Not only is it > fun (for those of us who enjoy this sort of philosophical wrangling) > but I expect it's what JKR *wants* us to do. Alla: For sure, as I said above far be it from me to object to that. But that does not mean that if people honestly do not see anything wrong with Harry's actions in one scene or another , they will not counterargue. JMO, Alla From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 20:02:18 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 20:02:18 -0000 Subject: Draco's Personality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165075 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Draco made a choice to *not* be a killer, but I don't think he > > made an active choice to become something else. I think he > > left the Tower in the middle of his crises of faith. > >>Carol: > > I don't think he made a choice on the tower at all. Lowering the > wand a "fraction" is not an emphatic refusal to do the Death > Eater's will. It's simply a sign that he can't do what they want > him to do. If it were a courageous, deliberate choice, he'd have > tried to fight them, or at least said, "You'll have to kill me > because I'm not going to do this." > Betsy Hp: Draco does remain still while the Death Eaters around him urge him to kill Dumbledore. (If IIRC, the ask him to do so three times.) Draco has been tied with Sartre's philosophical concent of "bad faith". And one of Sartre's examples is a woman frozen in the act of choosing, delaying the moment that she actively *becomes* something. See here for full example, etc.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Faith So while I agree that Draco has not *completed* his choice, I think it's a mistake to say that he hasn't *started* to. Draco *stops* acting the role of perfect little Death Eater. That's step one. He needs to become who he is, yes (shown by choice, per the books). But I think he's made a start by no longer trying to be what he isn't. Heh, I'm not exactly sure if I'm agreeing or disagreeing with you here, Carol. Because I wouldn't say Draco aggressively made a choice. But his very passivity (one could almost call it *stubborn* passivity ) is a choice in and of itself. But he does still need to make an active choice. > >>Carol: > I don't think that Draco will become a full-fledged Death Eater, but > his moment of choice hasn't come. > Betsy Hp: Hmm, actually I think Draco is right in the middle of his moment of choice. His story was very much left hanging. Of course, who knows how long JKR will leave him dangling. Betsy Hp From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Feb 16 20:09:56 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 20:09:56 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165076 > > Magpie: > > I'm equally impressed with the tenacity that the issue keeps getting > > changed. > > > > The actual issue is, if you *did* say the wrong thing in a split > > second decision, would you be able to consider that you said the > > wrong thing? Or would you insist you must have done the right > thing, > > or the best thing you could do, because you did it. Or can your > > actions not be spoken about at all because of what somebody else did > > or what the situation was? Because if Harry didn't make the best > > decision here you'd think it wouldn't be so shocking that anyone > > would actually say that. > > Alla: > > Um, I think you are changing it a bit as well, frankly. And I do not > see anything wrong with it :) > > I thought that you were arguing that there is an element of intent in > Harry using Sectusemptra, if you did, that is for me quite different > from what you wrote in this paragraph. Magpie: Probably we're all just trying to yank the conversation back to what we want to talk about, and we all keep having somebody else fit our words into their framework.:-) I did say there is an element of intent and I'm always going to say that--I have a hard time allowing people to do things with no intent unless they're possessed or under Imperio or something like that. But also one of the things I don't get is wanting to take an memorable moment in canon and explain it away so it doesn't mean anything more than what it means that Neville occasionally flings Flitwick across the room because he doesn't do Charms well. If Harry does something, I'm going to look at why Harry does it and part of why Harry does this is asking "Why does Harry choose this particular spell in this extreme moment?" I don't think the answer is that it happened to be in his brain (he gets through most of the fight without it--there's not even a note saying Harry's mind went blank and all that was there was that stupid spell he kept thinking about). I think it's a combination of things including, of course, the Prince's important explanation of "for enemies." Alla: > Because to realise and acknowledge that you chose the wrong spell is > quite different from acknowledging that Harry wanted to hurt Draco in > that scene. You see it ( intent I mean), I do not, I mean, I see him > wanting to hurt to the extent of defending himself ( how else you can > stop the attacker, except by hurting him?) Magpie: I am acknowledging Harry that hurting Draco is quite possibly something Harry wanted to do (definitely not something Harry is or should be sure he did not want to do), and that "for enemies" suggests an understanding between Harry and the Prince about what enemies get. Harry wanted to hurt McLaggen too, for annoying him. He didn't want to go so far as to split him open and almost kill him, but there's a reason he's not eager to try the spell out on Ron. Harry's problem is that he did not want to hurt Draco that much, not that he would never want to hurt Draco. Wanting to hurt Draco is not unusual for Harry. Alla: > But I do not see intent to hurt for the sake of hurt, if that makes > sense. Magpie: I think he wanted to hurt for the sake of winning the fight, mostly. Alla: > And I am still trying to figure out how is it wrong to argue self > defense if it is to answer to people who argue that it was not self > defense? Magpie: It's wrong to argue it was self-defense when the other person isn't arguing that it wasn't self-defense. Harry can be acting in self- defense *and also* want to lash out at a person for putting them in that position. When I hear someone say "If you try to shoot me I'm not going to care about your well-being. I'm going to blow your head off!" That, imo, is not "not caring" about the other person's well- being, it's wanting to obliterate that person. And in the heat of the moment (or just in the heat of thinking about such a moment) that's a common, natural desire to have. But there is an intent there that you're feeling. Sometimes you might need a little actual anger and hatred to get you to blow that head off--and it's going to *feel* differently than it would feel if the gun just went off in your hand. It might still get you the same verdict of self-defense, but we're dissecting the moment and character here, not deciding whether to sentence Harry or not. Alla: > > It seems to be obvious for the canon characters, but the issue gets > raised that it was not clear self defense, so it is not **my** issue, > it is an objection against classifying this scene differently, that > is all. Magpie: But I think what others of us are saying is that nobody has ever said anything close to Draco being the one on the defensive. They just don't consider that acting in self-defense is all there is to it. Remember that doesn't have to mean they're looking at it as if it's a crime and Harry's guilty. It's not like this is about saying Harry got away with something, it's specifically about Harry knowing his own state of mind. This isn't an uncommon thing in things like this, for the person to wonder about what they were really acting on in that moment, particularly if it was a violent moment. Being interested in examining that moment isn't about ignoring that that Harry had somebody coming at him with a potential Crucio. > > Magpie: > Rather than justifying Harry's decision at > > every turn and answering any disagreements anyone might have with > > those justifications with accusations that the person's expecting > > Harry to be perfect or has never made a mistake themselves--so > let's > > get back to talking about how Harry is being unfairly treated > again. > > I would guess many people who point out that Harry didn't *have to* > > use this spell and is somewhat responsible for casting it have > > probably made plenty of mistakes themselves and might even be > > thinking about them and identifying with Harry in that situation. > > Alla: > > And some people ( or me :)) point out that under circumstances Harry > was in, he may not have chosen the best spell, but the mistake he > made was still while acting in self-defense. > > I do not see **intent** in that scene at all, except as I said above > the intent one would have to stop the attacker. You cannot do it by > hugging him IMO. Magpie: So we all agree that Harry was acting in self-defense. We disagree on how he came upon "the wrong spell." You think it was just a case of hearing a word at the wrong time, like hitting the wrong button, and that Harry has nothing to be sorry for. Other people think the wrong spell had something more to do with understanding that this was the correct place to use the spell, and believing in the Prince to give him what he needed just as the Prince always had, but not realizing how extreme the spell was, and weilding it with too much force, having never used it before--and that this is something the character would feel uncomfortable about later. So we should move on from thinking it's got to do with self-defense and just concentrate on "Why did Harry pick that spell?" understanding that question does not have to imply that Harry wasn't acting in self-defense. > Magpie: > > I think Harry's longtime relationship with Draco, and his being > drawn > > to the "for enemies" idea of the spell, and the power that he > > unleashed in himself without consciously wanting to are part of the > > story and Harry too. Harry doesn't always have to be the biggest > > victim in the scene. > > Alla: > > No, Harry does not have to be the biggest victim in every scene and > he was not, but he IMO absolutely could have been. But neither would > I agree to Draco being the victim in this scene, except of his own > actions. Magpie: Sure he could have been the bigger victim in the scene, though he wasn't. But I would never say that Draco was only the victim of his own actions in the scene--iow, that he is responsible for Harry's actions as well as his own--as long as Harry's there as a separate human being acting on his own behalf. He's responsible for his own actions and certainly has responsibility for the consequences of his own actions...but that's why Harry does too. He's still a character in the scene. > Alla: > > LOLOLOLOL. I find this kind of logic to be truly fascinating. So, > what I hear you saying that it is all **Harry's fault** for walking > in the bathroom and he should have expected to find Malfoy there and > be greeted with unforgivable? Got it. Magpie: I thought she was mocking that kind of logic. -m From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Feb 16 20:39:48 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 20:39:48 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165077 > Alla: > > No, Harry does not have to be the biggest victim in every scene and > he was not, but he IMO absolutely could have been. But neither would > I agree to Draco being the victim in this scene, except of his own > actions. Pippin: Then using an illegal spell is a victimless crime? Here's an analogy: if I am driving a car which I know has not passed a required safety inspection, and I lose control of it while swerving to avoid a drunken driver, I wouldn't assume I had no responsibility for the accident. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 20:49:03 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 20:49:03 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165078 > Magpie: > I am acknowledging Harry that hurting Draco is quite possibly > something Harry wanted to do (definitely not something Harry is or > should be sure he did not want to do), and that "for enemies" > suggests an understanding between Harry and the Prince about what > enemies get. Harry wanted to hurt McLaggen too, for annoying him. He > didn't want to go so far as to split him open and almost kill him, > but there's a reason he's not eager to try the spell out on Ron. > Harry's problem is that he did not want to hurt Draco that much, not > that he would never want to hurt Draco. Wanting to hurt Draco is not > unusual for Harry. Alla: Oh, man. I am sorry to keep harping on it, but I still do not get it. Could you give me a quote that says that Harry wanted to hurt Draco? Besides the fact that spell is marked for enemies. I mean, I know I said it many times, but isn't the one who throws Crucio at you your enemy and should be stopped? And if you are basing Harry alleged intent to hurt Draco on their history, well, maybe the significance of that scene is because it is different from their history? > Alla: > > But I do not see intent to hurt for the sake of hurt, if that > makes > > sense. > > Magpie: > I think he wanted to hurt for the sake of winning the fight, mostly. Alla: How else he can defend himself but to win a fight? > Alla: > > And I am still trying to figure out how is it wrong to argue self > > defense if it is to answer to people who argue that it was not > self > > defense? > > Magpie: > It's wrong to argue it was self-defense when the other person isn't > arguing that it wasn't self-defense. Harry can be acting in self- > defense *and also* want to lash out at a person for putting them in > that position. Alla: Sure, he can, I just do not think he does. Magpie: When I hear someone say "If you try to shoot me I'm > not going to care about your well-being. I'm going to blow your head > off!" That, imo, is not "not caring" about the other person's well- > being, it's wanting to obliterate that person. And in the heat of > the moment (or just in the heat of thinking about such a moment) > that's a common, natural desire to have. But there is an intent > there that you're feeling. Sometimes you might need a little actual > anger and hatred to get you to blow that head off--and it's going to > *feel* differently than it would feel if the gun just went off in > your hand. It might still get you the same verdict of self-defense, > but we're dissecting the moment and character here, not deciding > whether to sentence Harry or not. Alla: The problem I see with this analogy is that the scene already happening, I do not remember Harry wanting to hurt Draco beforehand, thinking about it. Not about spell, but about hurting Draco with it. > > Magpie: > So we all agree that Harry was acting in self-defense. We disagree > on how he came upon "the wrong spell." Alla: You and me, yes. :) Magpie: You think it was just a case > of hearing a word at the wrong time, like hitting the wrong button, > and that Harry has nothing to be sorry for. Alla: **no**. I do think that Harry has something to be sorry for, but only for wanting to try out the unknown spell. Magpie: Other people think the > wrong spell had something more to do with understanding that this > was the correct place to use the spell, and believing in the Prince > to give him what he needed just as the Prince always had, but not > realizing how extreme the spell was, and wielding it with too much > force, having never used it before--and that this is something the > character would feel uncomfortable about later. So we should move on > from thinking it's got to do with self-defense and just concentrate > on "Why did Harry pick that spell?" understanding that question does > not have to imply that Harry wasn't acting in self-defense. Alla: Sorry, still do not get it. I have no problem with anything that you said, but won't you say that the intent excludes self-defense? That is my main problem. You keep saying that you agree that it was self- defense, but when you claim that Harry had intent to hurt Draco, I am not sure that you do agree to that. > > Alla: > > > > LOLOLOLOL. I find this kind of logic to be truly fascinating. So, > > what I hear you saying that it is all **Harry's fault** for > walking > > in the bathroom and he should have expected to find Malfoy there > and > > be greeted with unforgivable? Got it. > > Magpie: > I thought she was mocking that kind of logic. > > -m > Alla: Oh, I thought she was mocking as well ( which is her right of course) and I am sure Marion would correct whichever one of us is wrong, but I thought she was mocking something different from what you do. Here is the full quote I was responding to: " Marion: As long as Harry refuses to take responsibility for his own mistakes and as long as he keeps blaming others for them ("it wasn't stupid and discrimitory of me to suspect Snape of wanting to steal the Philosopher's Stone just because I think he doesn't like me, Snape is still evil and I refuse to listen to him or learn from him because no matter what it takes, I'll proof that he's evil for not liking me", "it wasn't me stupidly rushing to the MoM that got Sirius killed, it wasn't Sirius' own rashness that got him killed, heck, it wasn't even Bellatrix curse that got Sirius killed - it was all SNAPE's fault!!", "it wasn't my decision to follow Draco around and spying on him that got us into a fight, it wasn't my throwing a slicing hex at him that got him into hospital, it was all Snape's fault for writing the hex in the first place!!"), in short, as long as Harry refuses to acknowledge his mistakes, and - God forbid! - even *learn* from them, I can't see him as any kind of Hero at all." Alla: I snipped Harry's other mistakes and left the only one I wanted to talk about. So, correct me if I am wrong, but I read this paragraph that contrary to what Harry thinks, what did got Draco into the fight with Harry was Harry spying on him. Do you read it somewhat differently? I thought she was listing multiple justifications that Harry is using for himself and that he should acknowledge them, etc and only then he will be true hero for Marion. So, don't you think that "it wasn't my decision to follow Draco around and spying on him that got us into a fight, it wasn't my throwing a slicing hex at him that got him into hospital, it was all Snape's fault for writing the hex in the first place!!"), was mockery of Harry refusing to acknowledge something as true? And if you think it was, could you tell me how exactly Harry's spying on Draco made him throw Unforgivable at him? I am very curious. > > Alla: > > > > No, Harry does not have to be the biggest victim in every scene and > > he was not, but he IMO absolutely could have been. But neither would > > I agree to Draco being the victim in this scene, except of his own > > actions. > > Pippin: > Then using an illegal spell is a victimless crime? > > Here's an analogy: if I am driving a car which I know has not passed > a required safety inspection, and I lose control of it while swerving > to avoid a drunken driver, I wouldn't assume I had no responsibility > for the accident. Alla: I am not seeing the exact analogy. Let's change it a little bit and then it would suit me better - if you are driving the car that did not pass safety inspection and you are trying to avoid the driver that you **know** is trying to kill you, then I would think that your responsibility here would be **very** minimal. No maybes, no just drunken driver **may** have run into you or not, you know for sure, that if you do not avoid him, you are dead. Sorry, Pippin, I do not think I would hold you very responsible here. But to me the better analogy would be if somebody gave me a gun as a gift ( hate guns, but for the sake of argument) and I am thinking about it, but am not asking anybody how this gun operates, I am putting this gun closer to me on my desk, then anything else. There is an intruder in my house, he is pointing a gun at me, I am pretty sure it is the real one. I am reaching for this gun, pressing the button and this gun blows the intruder off completely. That is the closest to RL analogy I can get, sort of. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 20:55:59 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 20:55:59 -0000 Subject: Neville Longbotttom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165079 colebiancardi: > > quite frankly, what similarities? Other than Neville being round-faced, there aren't any. Neville isn't a hanger-on like Peter, Neville has courage to stand up to his friends(PS/SS), Neville isn't a suck-up like Peter was, and so on. > > In fact, Neville is very much his own person. Just because Peter & Neville both have round faces, doesn't mean there are similiarties. Neville's parents were both driven insane by DE's; Neville was supposed to be thought a squib for many years by his family; Peter seemed to have some talent early on, due to his wormtail persona. > > I never "got" any similarities between Neville & Peter - Harry, way back when, used to envision Peter as a Neville looking type - I believe it was in PoA, but other than that, I cannot see anything remotely tieing those 2 characters together. Carol responds: Exactly. The similarity exists only in Harry's mind before he meets Peter or even knows that he's alive, much less that he's Scabbers. Since Peter is described as a little fat boy and a tagalong, not as good at magic as his friends (quite possibly a mistaken impression on McGonagall's part), Harry *imagines* him as looking like Neville. He also imagines him as the innocent victim of the murderous Sirius Black, whose photo reminds him of the pictures of vampires that he's seen in his DADA textbook. There's as much connection between Neville, who, as you say, is genuinely brave despite his seeming timidity, and the cowardly, self-serving Peter as between the Grim-looking Black and Count Dracula. The similarity between Peter and Neville exists solely in Harry's mind when he imagines Pettigrew futilely attempting to stand up to the "murderin' traitor" who betrayed Lily and James. (He underestimates Neville's courage and capabilities by casting him in the role of timid little fat boy, but that's different from failing to see a capacity for treachery, which in Neville's case surely doesn't exist and in Peter's unquestionably does.) Neville's parents were tortured into insanity by Death Eaters. It's most unlikely that he will betray their memory and join Voldemort. I'm not sure that Pettigrew even has a round face like Neville's. When we first see him, his grungy skin is hanging off him because he's lost a lot of weight too quickly. IIRC, he has a pointy nose and small, watery eyes. In short, he's a rat, literally and figuratively, and he looks like one--a rather sad commentary on JKR's attempts to avoid stereotyping and judging by appearance, but sometimes theme, like character, has to be sacrificed to plot. Carol, who happens to like rats, at least the white ones with pink eyes, which never betray anybody and like to ride on your shoulder From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Feb 16 22:14:42 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 22:14:42 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165080 > > Alla: > > I am not seeing the exact analogy. Let's change it a little bit and > then it would suit me better - if you are driving the car that did > not pass safety inspection and you are trying to avoid the driver > that you **know** is trying to kill you, then I would think that your > responsibility here would be **very** minimal. No maybes, no just > drunken driver **may** have run into you or not, you know for sure, > that if you do not avoid him, you are dead. Pippin: But Harry doesn't *know* that Draco is trying to kill him. In fact Harry says himself, at least twice, that if he'd known what the spell did, he wouldn't have used it on Malfoy. He does use it, later, on the Inferi he knows are trying to kill him, and on Snape whom he believes has just killed Dumbledore. So I can't see why we shouldn't think Draco is the victim of Harry's reckless use of force as well as his own aggression when Harry himself thinks so. As Dumbledore says, indifference and neglect often do more damage than outright dislike, and this is a perfect example. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 22:19:57 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 22:19:57 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165081 > Pippin: > But Harry doesn't *know* that Draco is trying to kill him. In fact Harry > says himself, at least twice, that if he'd known what the spell did, he > wouldn't have used it on Malfoy. He does use it, later, on the Inferi > he knows are trying to kill him, and on Snape whom he believes has > just killed Dumbledore. So I can't see why we shouldn't think Draco > is the victim of Harry's reckless use of force as well as his own > aggression when Harry himself thinks so. As Dumbledore says, > indifference and neglect often do more damage than outright > dislike, and this is a perfect example. Alla: My bad, I thought I was clear - this is the trouble with RL analogies. They are only helpful sort of. Harry knows that he can became insane from Cruciatus, not dead. I do not see how it is much difference though. Sure, Harry later uses the spell when he knows what the spell does. And I cannot tell anybody what to think LOL, I can only say what I think. And indifference and neglect? Of whom? Of somebody who throws Crucio at you? I do not see how DD's quote is applicable, sorry. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 22:42:04 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 22:42:04 -0000 Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book/Free passes to characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165082 > >>Alla: > But what I agree with you is that the amount of scrutiny of good > guys is much higher than the character you mentioned. And again, I > deeply respect everybody's rights to point out characters ethical > mistakes, **every** character mistake, but I do find it amusing > when Snape is given free pass for everything starting from his > teaching tactics and ending up with murder. IMO of course. > Betsy Hp: (Just a clarification point: did you mean *dis*agree in that first sentence? Because I'd actually say that Snape is one of the most scrutinized characters in the Potter-verse.) I guess I just wonder whose posts you're laughing at. Who has ever given Snape a "free pass" at teaching tactics or the murder of Dumbledore? Has *anyone* while discussing Snape said that his various actions just plain don't count and shouldn't be looked at all? I don't recall anyone doing so. Taking myself, I am on one side of the extreme in that I think Snape is actually a very good teacher (one of Hogwarts' best, IMO) and that he enjoys his job. (This isn't a popular position, even amongst Snape lovers. ) But even given that, I *do* see times where Snape, as a teacher, either makes a mistake or lets his emotions (anger usually) get the best of him. I just don't think he's abusive and I don't think he should be strung up by his toe-nails. Is that what is meant by a "free pass"? > >>Alla: > > Basically any justification of what Snape does to Trio reads to me > as an excuse. > Betsy Hp: Right, but that just means you see Snape as pretty much black. All of his actions are based on something negative. People will argue against your perspective and, for example, say that Snape taking points from Gryffindor because Hermione helped Neville on a potion was justified. That's disagreeing with your position that none of Snape's actions towards the Trio are justified, but it's not giving Snape a free pass. To give Snape a free pass in that example would be to say something like, "taking the points was wrong, but since it's Snape I'm totally cool with it". And that's not the sort of argument I see getting made. (Except when it comes to the good guys actually. But that's because there's an attempt to squeeze the good guys into "white hats".) > >>Alla: > > And not that I do not do it myself. For example, to go back to > Harry's using Unforgivables. > > Having said that, I absolutely excuse Harry here because of the > pain he was in, etc. It does not mean though that I would call his > action right, not at all. I am not going to say that there is any > sound reason for him to do so, except the pain he was in, but this > **is** an excuse. Betsy Hp: Yes, but this sort of "excusing" or handing out of free passes generally only happens with the good guys. It's going on with the bathroom scene discussion right now. Instead of agreeing that, yes slicing someone open is not a good thing to do, folks are trying to say "well it's a bad thing, but since it's Harry I'm cool with it". I have *not* seen that happen with Snape. If it's the Tower no one (that I've seen) has said "murdering Dumbledore was wrong, but since it's Snape, I'm cool with it". Some folks say he had no choice, others say, he didn't actually kill Dumbledore, and others say, he killed Dumbledore on Dumbledore's own orders. But that's not the same as saying murder is fine especially since it's Snape. > >>Betsy Hp: > > Most of the characters are gray. > > > >>Alla: > Are they though? Sure, there is greyness in every character. But to > compare greyness in say Ron and Snape? > Betsy Hp: Of course there are different shades! That's the very definition of gray -- there's wiggle room. And discussions should make room for it. > >>Alla: > I am just thinking that a little equality would be nice :) > Not a requirement mind you, but I do agree with Eggplant that Snape > is not scrutinised as much as everybody else **at all*. Betsy Hp: Well first off, I completely disagree that Snape doesn't get scrutinized. Goodness, how often to we get folks signing off with "I hate Snape discussions!" tags? Too often, IMO! But I do agree that there's a lack of equality in the judgement of characters. The good guys can do something completely cowardly and ignoble (like say, an adult attacking a child because he doesn't like what that child's father just said, yes I'm looking at you Hagrid) and everyone talks about how gosh darn funny it was. And a bad guy can make the noble decision to not kill an unarmed opponent (Draco vs. Dumbledore on the Tower) and suddenly it means the non-killer is a coward. And I honestly think that inequality comes about because folks are very intent on shoving these gray characters into a black or white box. > >>Betsy: > > Any interpertations of character that insist on making every > > decision Hermione makes absolutely correct are going to founder. > > Just as any attempts to force Draco into a purely negative mold > > are going to founder. JKR won't allow it, bless her. > >>Alla: > But interpretations that make Hermione a potential Umbridge and > Draco, let's see a victim of Harry's spying ( after all, that is > the reason that Draco attacked him with Crucio ) are amusing. Betsy Hp: You may find them such, but they are not giving any of the characters a free pass, and they're not coming from a sanctimonious need for character perfection. Which is two sides of an attitude that I think builds a straw man rather than addresses the actual issues. > >>Alla: > > But that does not mean that if people honestly do not see anything > wrong with Harry's actions in one scene or another, they will not > counterargue. Betsy Hp: Which is fine, of course. The whole point is that JKR leaves plenty of room for discussion. I was more suggesting that the "no one is perfect so we shouldn't be allowed to argue that Harry isn't perfect" argument is an attempt to move the discussion *away* from Harry. In a sense it's saying that because Harry is a "good guy" none of his actions should ever be questioned: they're either good or they're character seasoning. I think that's starting from a false premise, and doing JKR a disservice. Betsy Hp From Vexingconfection at aol.com Fri Feb 16 22:01:45 2007 From: Vexingconfection at aol.com (Vexingconfection at aol.com) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:01:45 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Underage wizards Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165083 > >>montims: >> At least it was a legitimate spell, unlike the other magic she would have been performing inadvertantly before the age of 11... The MoM appears to be able to tell what spell was used straight away, not just that unspecified magic was used... << Didn't she practice at home before her first trip on the Hogwarts Express? I have to go check HP and the sorcerers stone again - thanks for responding. Vexingconfection From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 16 23:12:59 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 23:12:59 -0000 Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book/Free passes to characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165084 > Betsy Hp: > (Just a clarification point: did you mean *dis*agree in that first > sentence? Because I'd actually say that Snape is one of the most > scrutinized characters in the Potter-verse.) > > I guess I just wonder whose posts you're laughing at. Who has ever > given Snape a "free pass" at teaching tactics or the murder of > Dumbledore? Has *anyone* while discussing Snape said that his > various actions just plain don't count and shouldn't be looked at > all? I don't recall anyone doing so. Alla: I do, plenty of times, but we may have different definitions of what it means to give character free pass. But read on. Betsy Hp: > Taking myself, I am on one side of the extreme in that I think Snape > is actually a very good teacher (one of Hogwarts' best, IMO) and that > he enjoys his job. (This isn't a popular position, even amongst > Snape lovers. ) But even given that, I *do* see times where Snape, > as a teacher, either makes a mistake or lets his emotions (anger > usually) get the best of him. I just don't think he's abusive and I > don't think he should be strung up by his toe-nails. Is that what is > meant by a "free pass"? Alla: Depends. If your general position that he is a very good teacher of Harry and Neville, then yes, I absolutely think that you are giving him a free pass on multiple bad things he did to those boys. On the other hand, if your position is that he **is** a jerk, just not necessarily abuser ( sort of less extreme sort of badness), I can see that and will not call that giving him a free pass. I will just disagree with you :) You can tell me that you do not consider those things to be bad, but sorry, there are just some things that to me are bad, period. Like hating the child because he reminds you of his dead father, I am going to be insisting that it is horrible whether one considers it as such or not. Look, again, those are just opinions obviously and I understand you disagree that Snape is given free pass, I hope I was clear why I consider it to be so. > Betsy Hp: > Yes, but this sort of "excusing" or handing out of free passes > generally only happens with the good guys. It's going on with the > bathroom scene discussion right now. Instead of agreeing that, yes > slicing someone open is not a good thing to do, folks are trying to > say "well it's a bad thing, but since it's Harry I'm cool with it". Alla: Nope, **it's a bad thing, but I am okay with that, because I see it as self defense and would see it as self defense no matter who would be involved** Betsy Hp: > I have *not* seen that happen with Snape. If it's the Tower no one > (that I've seen) has said "murdering Dumbledore was wrong, but since > it's Snape, I'm cool with it". Some folks say he had no choice, > others say, he didn't actually kill Dumbledore, and others say, he > killed Dumbledore on Dumbledore's own orders. But that's not the > same as saying murder is fine especially since it's Snape. Alla: Well, we had been reading different posts and we do have different definitions of what it means to give a free pass. To me - give free pass means absolve **any** character of responsibility for what he did. Seriously, would you like me to send you posts absolving Snape of **any** responsibility for what happened on the Tower? It is either as I said upthread: 1. All Dumbledore's fault because he demanded that Snape killed him for Dumbledore's plan to come true. 2. Snape should have saved himself first and foremost, because Dumbledore is useless and Snape is useful as a spy ( then UV comes as a reason Snape should have saved himself) Basically, to me giving character free pass means that he is not responsible for what he did. And in the book where author stresses how bad murder is, to say that Snape is not responsible for the murder, yes, to me that means to give character a free pass, absolutely it does. > Betsy Hp: > Well first off, I completely disagree that Snape doesn't get > scrutinized. Goodness, how often to we get folks signing off with "I > hate Snape discussions!" tags? Too often, IMO! Alla: Sure, I should have said Snape gets approval of his actions. Betsy Hp: > But I do agree that there's a lack of equality in the judgement of > characters. The good guys can do something completely cowardly and > ignoble (like say, an adult attacking a child because he doesn't like > what that child's father just said, yes I'm looking at you Hagrid) > and everyone talks about how gosh darn funny it was. And a bad guy > can make the noble decision to not kill an unarmed opponent (Draco > vs. Dumbledore on the Tower) and suddenly it means the non-killer is > a coward. Alla: Draco? Made a noble decision on the Tower? From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Feb 16 23:15:10 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 23:15:10 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165085 > > Alla: > > My bad, I thought I was clear - this is the trouble with RL > analogies. They are only helpful sort of. > Harry knows that he can became insane from Cruciatus, not dead. I do > not see how it is much difference though. Pippin: I think Harry used the spell because he was losing the fight, not because he was threatened with insanity. Otherwise it doesn't make sense that he wouldn't have used the spell on Malfoy if he'd known what it did. Or are you saying that Harry meant he would rather have risked insanity than used that spell? Alla: > And indifference and neglect? Of whom? Of somebody who throws Crucio > at you? I do not see how DD's quote is applicable, sorry. > Pippin: Indifference and neglect towards his fellow wizards, who have agreed that unapproved spells should not be in the hands of any wizard, much less an underaged school child. I would hate for anyone to think it is okay for kids to bring weapons to school because there's a possibility they might be attacked. Pippin From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Feb 16 23:56:18 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:56:18 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again LONG References: Message-ID: <008301c75226$0f92eaf0$0678400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165086 >> Magpie: >> I am acknowledging Harry that hurting Draco is quite possibly >> something Harry wanted to do (definitely not something Harry is or >> should be sure he did not want to do), and that "for enemies" >> suggests an understanding between Harry and the Prince about what >> enemies get. Harry wanted to hurt McLaggen too, for annoying him. > He >> didn't want to go so far as to split him open and almost kill him, >> but there's a reason he's not eager to try the spell out on Ron. >> Harry's problem is that he did not want to hurt Draco that much, > not >> that he would never want to hurt Draco. Wanting to hurt Draco is > not >> unusual for Harry. > > Alla: > > Oh, man. I am sorry to keep harping on it, but I still do not get it. > Could you give me a quote that says that Harry wanted to hurt Draco? Magpie: Regarding this scene? There is no quote. We're all looking at the events and the events leading up to it and interpreting what we think is going on underneath. Alla:> > Besides the fact that spell is marked for enemies. I mean, I know I > said it many times, but isn't the one who throws Crucio at you your > enemy and should be stopped? Magpie: Presumably he's you're enemy and must be stopped from throwing a Crucio, yes. When Harry reads the spell he interprets it as something fun to do to someone you don't like, not "spell to stop Crucio." He seems to always see it as an offensive rather than defensive spell. Alla: > And if you are basing Harry alleged intent to hurt Draco on their > history, well, maybe the significance of that scene is because it is > different from their history? Magpie: Yes, I'm basing it on their history, and the spell saying "for enemies" and maybe also Harry's guilty conscience later. But I didn't say Harry necessarily did mean to hurt Draco--certainly there's no reason to think he meant to hurt him as much as he did. I said I think Harry is probably not sure about it himself. When you hate someone for years and get pleasure out of bad things happening to them, and then you cause them pain and injury, I don't think it's uncommon to think about wish fulfillment. Especially if you caused them this pain and suffering in a fight. Similarly, I wouldn't think it would go amiss if Draco had similar unpleasant thoughts about his deserving getting ripped apart that way after the way he's behaved towards Harry. It's a bit like Dumbledore ways about how it's easier to forgive someone for being wrong than being right. Only in this case it's more like it's easier to apologize for gutting someone accidentally if they're someone you generally don't want to see hurt rather than someobdy you do. >> Alla: >> > But I do not see intent to hurt for the sake of hurt, if that >> makes >> > sense. >> >> Magpie: >> I think he wanted to hurt for the sake of winning the fight, mostly. > > Alla: > > How else he can defend himself but to win a fight? Magpie: In Harry's case he thought the "win the fight" spell was Sectumsempra. So he got what he wanted--which turned out to be tearing Draco apart. > Magpie: > When I hear someone say "If you try to shoot me I'm >> not going to care about your well-being. I'm going to blow your > head >> off!" That, imo, is not "not caring" about the other person's well- >> being, it's wanting to obliterate that person. And in the heat of >> the moment (or just in the heat of thinking about such a moment) >> that's a common, natural desire to have. But there is an intent >> there that you're feeling. Sometimes you might need a little actual >> anger and hatred to get you to blow that head off--and it's going > to >> *feel* differently than it would feel if the gun just went off in >> your hand. It might still get you the same verdict of self-defense, >> but we're dissecting the moment and character here, not deciding >> whether to sentence Harry or not. > > Alla: > > The problem I see with this analogy is that the scene already > happening, I do not remember Harry wanting to hurt Draco beforehand, > thinking about it. Not about spell, but about hurting Draco with it. Magpie: No, he's not thinking about it beforehand. It's what he decides in the heat of the moment. The "blow your head off" analogy applies to the heat of the moment too. >> Magpie: >> So we all agree that Harry was acting in self-defense. We disagree >> on how he came upon "the wrong spell." > > Alla: > > You and me, yes. :) > > Magpie: > You think it was just a case >> of hearing a word at the wrong time, like hitting the wrong button, >> and that Harry has nothing to be sorry for. > > Alla: > > **no**. I do think that Harry has something to be sorry for, but only > for wanting to try out the unknown spell. Magpie: So we disagree on that, but that's not disagreeing that he was acting in self defense. Btw, maybe it would help if you explained just how Harry should feel badly for trying out an unknown spell and why trying out an unknown spell is bad. > Magpie: > Other people think the >> wrong spell had something more to do with understanding that this >> was the correct place to use the spell, and believing in the Prince >> to give him what he needed just as the Prince always had, but not >> realizing how extreme the spell was, and wielding it with too much >> force, having never used it before--and that this is something the >> character would feel uncomfortable about later. So we should move > on >> from thinking it's got to do with self-defense and just concentrate >> on "Why did Harry pick that spell?" understanding that question > does >> not have to imply that Harry wasn't acting in self-defense. > > Alla: > > Sorry, still do not get it. I have no problem with anything that you > said, but won't you say that the intent excludes self-defense? That > is my main problem. You keep saying that you agree that it was self- > defense, but when you claim that Harry had intent to hurt Draco, I am > not sure that you do agree to that. Magpie: I'm equally confused as to why it's confusing. Harry can have thoughts about the person he's defending himself from as he's doing it. Ron attacked Harry under the influence of the love potion, yeah? If Ron had tried a Crucio and Harry had needed to defend himself from Ron, I think he would have done it with a completely different state of mind than he did with Draco, and afterwards I think he would have been able to be completely open about the kinds of guilt he felt afterwards if he felt guilt even after Ron was well again (sorry to hurt you--I was trying to stop you without hurting you). I don't think he'd just get little niggles of conscience later. Marion: > As long as Harry refuses to take responsibility for his own mistakes > and as long > as he keeps blaming others for them ("it wasn't stupid and > discrimitory of me to > suspect Snape of wanting to steal the Philosopher's Stone just > because I think > he doesn't like me, Snape is still evil and I refuse to listen to him > or learn > from him because no matter what it takes, I'll proof that he's evil > for not > liking me", "it wasn't me stupidly rushing to the MoM that got Sirius > killed, it > wasn't Sirius' own rashness that got him killed, heck, it wasn't even > Bellatrix > curse that got Sirius killed - it was all SNAPE's fault!!", "it > wasn't my > decision to follow Draco around and spying on him that got us into a > fight, it > wasn't my throwing a slicing hex at him that got him into hospital, > it was all > Snape's fault for writing the hex in the first place!!"), in short, > as long as > Harry refuses to acknowledge his mistakes, and - God forbid! - even > *learn* from > them, I can't see him as any kind of Hero at all." > > Alla: > I snipped Harry's other mistakes and left the only one I wanted to > talk about. So, correct me if I am wrong, but I read this paragraph > that contrary to what Harry thinks, what did got Draco into the fight > with Harry was Harry spying on him. Do you read it somewhat > differently? Magpie: I thought she was saying she thinks there's times Harry doesn't take responsibilty for his own mistakes, and prefers to blame it Snape. So I assumed she was mocking the idea of a person blaming all their actions on someone else--not saying that they should have responsibility for others actions. Like with Sirius, Harry did make mistakes that led to Sirius' death. He's not responsibility for Sirius' death, but neither is Snape. He feels better blaming Snape rather than saying here's how I felt, here's what I did, here's what he did in response, etc. -m From cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com Sat Feb 17 00:52:35 2007 From: cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com (Unspeakable) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 00:52:35 -0000 Subject: Hagrid, Eggs, and TT!Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165087 Hey Celia, Just wanted to thank you for an intriguing and enjoyable post! It *is* a wacky idea but inventive, plausible & difficult to disprove, IMHO. (I'm also a fan of time turners, as you'll see from my site. In fact, I believe there's a good chance that Voldemort acquired one during the Battle of the Department of Mysteries if he had not done so earlier.) Celia: I can give you a number of reasons why I think this will be important- read the cited post above for my original theory, but in short: it is a very strange word to select- "traveler"- which indicates that this fact about the person was significant to both Hagrid and Aragog's (it is Aragog who calls him/her a traveler- he must have learned that from Hagrid). The word is in the book and the movie (weird). Cassy: Interesting ... here's the quote from the COS film: Aragog: The monster was born in the castle. I came from a distant land, in the pocket of a traveler. To compare with the book: "I was not born in the castle. I come from a distant land. A traveler gave me to Hagrid when I was an egg." (COS15) I suppose it could just be filler ... but I agree it does feel like it might be significant. On the one hand, JKR tells us more than we need to know (couldn't Aragog have arrived in a crate of bananas or been purchased from the pet shop?!) .... on the other, she refuses to provide a full explanation ("traveler" is mysterious in a way that "merchant" is not, for example). It's also worth noting that Acromantula eggs are defined as Class A Non-Tradeable Goods by the Department of Regulation and Control of Magical Creatures, meaning that severe penalties are attached to their importation or sale (FB). So increasing the possibility that Hagrid's 'traveler' was a dark wizard... Celia: We know VM is thought to have been a world "traveler" during his missing years. And Quirrell!Mort tries the same technique to get Hagrid in trouble again in SS/PS, using a dragon egg to get info from him instead (so had he done it before?). Cassy: That's a very good point, IMHO ... Harry has good reason to be suspicious in PS/SS16. "Don't you think it's a bit odd," said Harry without slowing down, "that what Hagrid wants more than anything else is a dragon, and a stranger turns up who just happens to have an egg in his pocket? How many people wander around with dragon eggs if it's against wizard law? Lucky they found Hagrid, don't you think? Why didn't I see it before?" Yet we are spun the same line in COS, without the suggestion of foul play. Coincidence: or not? Celia: Therefore, I propose that during the missing years of Tom's transformation into VM, he time-turned into the past and WAS the "traveler" who came to Hogwarts and gave Hagrid the egg, to help his young self. Cassy: I like the fact that VM (like Shakespeare) had 'missing years'! Also, this puts me in mind of Voldemort's words in GOF33: "I, who have gone further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality. You know my goal ? to conquer death. And now, I was tested, and it appeared that one or more of my experiments worked ..." So the Horcruxes weren't the only experiment, methinks? And a wizard who is interested in immortality might well have considered time travel. Celia: I like the idea as well that an older and more corrupted VM existed alongside the younger version of himself for a number of years, possibly able to advise and guide his younger self towards darker and darker magic (from behind a big hood or something ). Cassy: Ooh ... I find this very tempting. We're all interested in the idea of Voldemort's possible mentor (I know Grindelwald is often cast in this role) but Dumbledore tells us that VM has never had a friend, nor has he ever wanted one. And this puts a different complexion on the idea of 'self-taught'(!)... (btw, didn't JKR also describe Dumbledore as mostly self-taught?). You've made me want to re-read the books looking for more evidence of TimeTurned!Voldemort.:-) Cassy V. (book7.co.uk: evidence-based synopsis) From unicornspride at centurytel.net Sat Feb 17 01:13:05 2007 From: unicornspride at centurytel.net (Lana) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:13:05 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... References: Message-ID: <012301c75230$c76177f0$2f01a8c0@Lana> No: HPFGUIDX 165088 >eviljunglechicken: >Harry didn't give over the Halfblood Prince's book, going as far as to lie about it and hide it. Would he really be so eager to >expose his taking credit for the remarkable innovations he's >shown in >potions which are not his work at all? Or risk admitting he considered using a fellow housemate as a human guinea >pig for this >particular curse which proved potentially fatal? >I don't think either of the two boys wanted this matter looked into >in any more detail. Lana writes: There is no doubt that neither boy would want it to be investigated nor have their memories drawn. However, if given the choice, I think Harry would have been more inclined to give in than Draco would have. No matter that Harry lied about Potions or not. I think that deep down Harry would have done the right thing and confessed everything. He is just that way. >wynnleaf wrote: I think in this case -- in the book -- JKR did not intend to suggest that there should have been any greater degree of >extensive questioning. Harry didn't offer any excuses of it being self- >defense, so there was no reason to search for evidence that it could have been self-defense. >We know through Harry that McGonagall and the entire staff knew a >good deal about the incident -- at least as far as the degree of >injury to Draco and the use of Dark Magic -- because McGonagall said it did merit expulsion. However, there's no hints from >anyone, including McGonagall who we can presume would stand >up for her student, that a normal staff practice would be to hold >some sort of >further inquiry. >So I think we have to assume, since all the staff knew about it, >that it wasn't a normal practice to do further inquiry. Lana writes: I agree completely. I don't htink there was ever the intention to do further investigation. While it does seem strange to me, it is possible (at least in my mind) that the teachers were preoccupied with more pressing matters. Draco could be healed and that is that. I do have to assume that since Harry did not offer excuses, it shows that Harry was not trying to cover anything up. It shows to me that he is prepared to accept consequence if not forced to tell the truth or at least put under pressure to tell the truth. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 17 03:42:44 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 03:42:44 -0000 Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book/Free passes to characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165089 > >>Betsy Hp: > > ...I *do* see times where Snape, as a teacher, either > > makes a mistake or lets his emotions (anger usually) get the best > > of him. I just don't think he's abusive and I don't think he > > should be strung up by his toe-nails. Is that what is meant by > > a "free pass"? > >>Alla: > Depends. If your general position that he is a very good teacher of > Harry and Neville, then yes, I absolutely think that you are giving > him a free pass on multiple bad things he did to those boys. On the > other hand, if your position is that he **is** a jerk, just not > necessarily abuser ( sort of less extreme sort of badness), I can > see that and will not call that giving him a free pass. I will just > disagree with you :) > You can tell me that you do not consider those things to be bad, > but sorry, there are just some things that to me are bad, period. > Betsy Hp: Ah, okay then, yes. I definitely give Snape a free-pass. But then I've seen plenty of other characters get free-passes too. (Choking Dudley was so funny!, etc.) So, in that sense, yup free-passes all over the place. And really, why waste time worrying about it? I guess it just comes down to what flavor gray one prefers. Or if one likes things gray to begin with. > >>Betsy Hp: > > But I do agree that there's a lack of equality in the judgement > > of characters. The good guys can do something completely > > cowardly and ignoble (like say, an adult attacking a child > > because he doesn't like what that child's father just said, yes > > I'm looking at you Hagrid) and everyone talks about how gosh darn > > funny it was. And a bad guy can make the noble decision to not > > kill an unarmed opponent (Draco vs. Dumbledore on the Tower) and > > suddenly it means the non-killer is a coward. > >>Alla: > Draco? Made a noble decision on the Tower? Betsy Hp: You'd prefer to call it cowardly? Betsy Hp From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Sat Feb 17 04:30:14 2007 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 04:30:14 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165090 > > Alla: > > > > No, Harry does not have to be the biggest victim in every scene > > and he was not, but he IMO absolutely could have been. But > > neither would I agree to Draco being the victim in this scene, > > except of his own actions. > > Pippin: > Then using an illegal spell is a victimless crime? Amiable Dorsai: How does Hermione's speculation that Levicorpus might not be "Ministry approved" (whatever that means) make Sectumsempra is an "illegal spell"? Lupin later tells Harry that Levicorpus enjoyed "a great vogue" while he (Lupin) was at Hogwarts. He says nothing about it being illegal. Pippin: > Here's an analogy: if I am driving a car which I know has not > passed a required safety inspection, and I lose control of it > while swerving to avoid a drunken driver, I wouldn't assume I > had no responsibility for the accident. Amiable Dorsai: Pretty good analogy, except that Harry only got into the car in desperation when Draco was actively trying to run him down, Draco was in full possession of his faculties when he tried to run Harry down, and we (and Harry) have exactly zero knowledge of the legal status of the spell. Other than that, not bad. Amiable "Going to Florida tomorrow! Woo Hoo!" Dorsai From belviso at attglobal.net Sat Feb 17 04:38:14 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 23:38:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... References: <012301c75230$c76177f0$2f01a8c0@Lana> Message-ID: <00de01c7524d$70dc8c90$0678400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165091 > >eviljunglechicken: >>Harry didn't give over the Halfblood Prince's book, going as far as > to lie about it and hide it. Would he really be so eager to > >expose > his taking credit for the remarkable innovations he's >>shown in >>potions which are not his work at all? Or risk admitting he > considered using a fellow housemate as a human guinea >>pig for this >>particular curse which proved potentially fatal? >>I don't think either of the two boys wanted this matter looked into >>in any more detail. > > Lana writes: > There is no doubt that neither boy would want it to be investigated nor > have their memories drawn. However, if given the choice, I think Harry > would have been more inclined to give in than Draco would have. No matter > that Harry lied about Potions or not. I think that deep down Harry would > have done the right thing and confessed everything. He is just that way. Magpie: Maybe I'm not getting what you're saying here--Harry had the opportunity to confess everything and he didn't. He hid the book, switched the covers, tried to protect his thoughts from Snape's Legilimancy. Protecting a secret was his priority in the scene. Harry's never been about confessing everything because it's the right thing to Snape. (Not that I think Draco would want to tell his own darker secrets either, obviously.) It's just you seem to be saying that from reading a scene where Harry *will not* give in and tell the truth even about something that he has been profiting by dishonestly, you get that deep down Harry was the kind of person who would confess. What he is hiding, he continues to hide. > Lana writes: > I agree completely. I don't htink there was ever the intention to do > further investigation. While it does seem strange to me, it is possible > (at least in my mind) that the teachers were preoccupied with more > pressing matters. Draco could be healed and that is that. I do have to > assume that since Harry did not offer excuses, it shows that Harry was not > trying to cover anything up. It shows to me that he is prepared to accept > consequence if not forced to tell the truth or at least put under pressure > to tell the truth. Magpie: I don't understand what you mean about his "not trying to cover up anything." He didn't seem to offer any excuses about the curse, no, but there's nothing for Harry to confess there since the thing he did wrong is already known. He was covering up the book and refused to admit to it. If he's *forced* to tell the truth (say, through Snape's Legilimancy) he's got to accept the consequences whether he likes it or not. "Accept" in that case meaning put up with. He doesn't accept his detentions in terms of saying, "You're right, I deserve these. I should be here." He says, iirc, that he's not a cheat and a liar and does not deserve detentions (at least he's says not a cheat and a liar, which Snape is saying he deserves detentions for), and is frustrated at the detentions when he has to suffer through them. Likewise Draco accepts his detentions from McGonagall earlier--he doesn't really have a choice. I'm not taking Snape's position here that Harry is completely dreadful, but I don't think what you're describing here is really Harry either. -m From greatraven at hotmail.com Sat Feb 17 07:19:26 2007 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 07:19:26 -0000 Subject: Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165092 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > I think it's just an example of Dumbledore's (and JKR's) eccentric > sense of humor, Dumbledore's literal interpretation of "a few words," > all of which happen to be either odd or humorous in themselves. The > Griffin door (Gryffindor) knocker, the textbook authors (e.g., > Libatius Borage, Wilbert Slinkhard), placenames like Diagon Alley and > Knockturn Alley all reflect that same delight in words, in and of > themselves. > > It's interesting that Percy answers Harry's question, "Is he--a bit > mad?" (Harry is reacting to DD's "few words") with "Mad? He's a > genius! Best wizard in the world! But he is a bit mad, yes" (SS 123). > So JKR, through Percy, is equating genius and madness, or, at least, > genius and eccentricity, humorously illustrated through these four > harmless and oddly whimsical words. > > Carol, wondering whether this eccentric side of Dumbledore is a mask > he wears for the students or an essential component of his complicated > essence Sue: Nah, I think Dumbledore really is eccentric and delightful. He's a lot like Gandalf - terribly serious when the fate of the world is involved and the rest of the time someone you'd be happy to have a pint with at the pub, or play a game of darts with. I agree with you about JKR's delight in words. From kazkitten29 at hotmail.co.uk Sat Feb 17 15:00:46 2007 From: kazkitten29 at hotmail.co.uk (kazkitten29) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:00:46 -0000 Subject: A Theory On Dumbledore's "Gleam of Triumph" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165093 Firstly, before I begin my ramble, I would like to say hello to everyone and explain that this is my first post and apologise in advance if I am merely going over old ground. I have been quietly obsessing on this topic for some time and, as I am rereading THBP aloud to my 8 year old son at the moment, I have gradually developed, IMO, what could be a plausable theory on the possible downfall of Voldemort - please let me know what you think. I used to believe, before the release of THBP, that however evil LV most definitely was, the main reason for this was due to the rejection by his natural father and the fact that this desertion led, inadvertently or not, to the death of his mother. Although murdering Tom Riddle Snr and his parents is undoubtedly extreme and points to an unbalanced and dangerous individual even Harry is capable of avenging his parents' death by killing the person responsible. However THBP showed me that this was not actually the case, perhaps deep down it helped him decide who to murder to attain his first horcrux but vengeance was not what drove him to murder in the first place. Therefore, IMO, Riddle Jnr does not seem to possess normal human emotions in any way. Everything he "feels" is geared towards attaining absolute power and immortality. I also believe that in giving Lily Potter chances to save herself he was not showing mercy but merely conducting a sadistic social experiment - would a loving mother sacrifice her child to save her own skin? I think if Lily had done so then she would have been killed anyway with LV taunting her with her sin as she died. In short, in the muggle world, he displays all the characteristics adherant to Narcissists and Sociopaths. >From this realisation I began to understand what DD's gleam of triumph on learning that LV had used Harry's blood in his regeneration ritual could mean, leading me to the following hypothesis: Harry, as I believe we all know, feels in so many ways. A child, and teenagers, feel so completely and absolutely all of the emotions that exist in the vast spectrum, without a thought of controlling, hiding or quashing them. They feel love, happiness, excitement, disappointment, pain, sorrow, hatred, envy, pity, disdain.....no matter how misplaced or inappropriate an emotion may be they at least have the ability to allow themselves to feel and learn from them. LV, however, does not possess this ability. He sees the ability to feel as a human weakness that deserves either to be destroyed or, as is more often the case, not even worthy of this - just an obvious failing to be exploited, mocked or derided. It was because of this that he underestimated the power of love and because he still has not allowed himself to feel and therefore understand emotions then he is continuing to make that same mistake. Basically my theory is, what if, having used Harry's blood and now having it run through his own veins, it begins to infect him with feelings he cannot understand or possibly deal with? After committing so many attrocities without a second though or ounce of regret imagine how it would feel to begin to experience empathy and guilt.....would an being such as LV be able to handle this? I personally dont think so. IMO, it is already starting to become apparent that LV is beginning to show signs of this "weakness". In OP Chapter 36 when LV possesses Harry and tries to taunt DD into killing him, his reaction to Harry's grief at losing Sirius, and basically welcoming death, is very telling; "And as Harry's heart filled with emotion, the creature's coils loosened, the pain was gone...." Why would LV, who has only shown contempt for emotions thus far, be suddenly afraid or incapable of dealing with them? Surely the LV of the past would have exploited Harry's pain, seized on the chance of fulfilling Harry's wish to die? My theory is that, on experiencing Harry's anguish of losing Sirius, LV suddenly felt guilt and remorse....now THAT would scare him wouldnt it? I think being trapped in a vicious circle of trying to eradicate the "affliction" in whatever way he could - such as continuing his mother and son's love experiment through Narcissa and Draco - but not escaping, simply adding to, the alien feeling of guilt, would be enough to send LV towards his own downfall. I believe that DD, wise and loving and patient, would have known this hence his gleam of triumph in GoF. To this end I wonder whether Harry will need to murder LV, thus destroying a part of his own soul - surely not a fate we, or DD, would wish to befall Harry - or whether LV will end his own life willingly or plead for merciful death ( could DD's frantic pleading while drinking the potion be a foreshadow of LV's end?) After all, surely to someone as barren to empathy and love as LV most certainly is, this would be exactly the fate karma would deal to him? I may be way off the mark with this theory but it made sense to me. Feel free to let me know if you agree or disagree :-) Kaz - who always looks for a redeeming quality in literary "bad guys" but recognises when there isnt one afterall. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Feb 17 15:39:57 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:39:57 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165094 > > Pippin: > > Then using an illegal spell is a victimless crime? > > Amiable Dorsai: > How does Hermione's speculation that Levicorpus might not be "Ministry > approved" (whatever that means) make Sectumsempra is an "illegal spell"? Pippin: Fair point. The ads in the Rumors section of JKR's website suggest that ministry approval is advisory only -- or it may be advisory for qualified wizards and mandatory for others, or maybe it's like the flying car and it's okay to study unapproved spells as long as you don't use them. I speculate. But it still means the burden is on Harry to know whether the spell is safe to use or not. Amiable Dorsai: > Pretty good analogy, except that Harry only got into the car in > desperation when Draco was actively trying to run him down, Draco was > in full possession of his faculties when he tried to run Harry down, > and we (and Harry) have exactly zero knowledge of the legal status of > the spell. > Pippin: You make it sound like Harry looked up as he fell and saw Sectum Sempra written on the ceiling. He had the spell "up his sleeve" as Ginny puts it, and he'd put it there with no intention of testing it to see whether it was relatively harmless before trying it. He just assumed that it was. That assumption was not only stupid, it was negligent, IMO. I'm no expert, but it seems that in the UK and the US, only the use of reasonable force is justified in defending oneself from attack. Harry thought he was using reasonable force but that itself was not a reasonable assumption, and Harry should have known that. Pippin From bawilson at citynet.net Sat Feb 17 16:31:19 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 11:31:19 -0500 Subject: Underage wizards Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165095 Please also remember that the Decree's title is for the "Reasonable Restriction" not "Prohibition" of Underage Magic. There is a difference. Anent the scene where Tonks, Lupin, & Co. come to rescue Harry, and why the Ministry didn't detect their magic--a spell that one wizard can cast, another can counter. If there is a spell to mask the use of magic in a monitored place, I'm sure that Mad Eye Moody at least would know it, and probably also Tonks and Shakbolt--it would a handy thing for an Auror to know. As a DADA expert, Lupin might also know it. Bruce Alan Wilson "The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sat Feb 17 16:54:38 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 16:54:38 -0000 Subject: Snape, the man we love to hate (was: Bathroom scene ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165096 "justcarol67" wrote: > I also remember your very thought-provoking > "Could I be wrong about Snape?" Thanks, but I didn't mean to imply that Snape was one of the good guys, only that I no longer considered the idea that he was to be crazy. It's not crazy but it could still be wrong. > yet he saves Harry from a Crucio and passes > up the opportunity to kill him. That's when Snape says: "Have you forgotten our orders? Potter belongs to the Dark Lord- we are to leave him. Go! Go!" Unfortunately I don't believe this incident tells us anything about Snape because his actions are perfectly consistent with the Snape is Dumbledore's man theory, the Snape is Voldemort's man theory, and the Snape is out for himself theory. Snape is Dumbledore's man: Obviously Dumbledore doesn't want Harry harmed, so Snape doesn't either. Snape is Voldemort's man: Snape is just following orders; and it's not hard to understand why Voldemort would give those orders. After Voldemort tried and failed to kill Harry 6 times he couldn't afford to look like a weakling and let a underling do what he could not. Snape is out for himself: Snape wants to be the most powerful wizard in the world, but 2 wizards stood in his way. Snape just killed one of them, and as he is one of the few who know that Harry is the only one who can kill the other, so he wants to make sure he lives long enough to do so. > he kills Dumbledore after an exchanged look That look is the one thing I have the most difficulty reconciling with the good Snape theory. Yes I've heard people draw parallels to Harry forcing the potion down Dumbledore's throat, but if we looked at Harry's face at that instant what would we see? Sadness certainly, and revulsion, and guilt, and fear; but would we see anger? Would we see hatred etched into the harsh lines of Harry's face? I don't think we would. > mean and vindictive as his detentions are, > they pale in comparison to Umbridge's sadism. Ok, I'll grant you that. > I care about him [Harry] and want him to > survive, but I really wish he would open > his eyes and stop seeing what he wants to > see, especially with regard to Snape, whom > he blames, fairly or unfairly, for > everything bad that happens. I don't care if Snape turns out to be good or bad you can't blame Harry for hating him, not after 6 years of abuse, not after he murdered Dumbledore right in front of his eyes. In a way I believe by the end of the last book he hates Snape even more than Dumbledore, it seems more personal somehow. And I can't get around the fact that this is a needless distraction to give to the only wizard who has a chance of killing Voldemort. If it was always Dumbledore's plan to have Snape kill him he must have had a HUGE reason not to tell Harry about it. > Why does Harry so quickly put the image > of Draco lying in a pool of blood out > of his mind? That one's easy, Harry had far more important things to think about than the bloody fate of his attacker. > Carol, who hopes that HRH will learn > from their mistakes and survive into > the Epilogue, along with Neville and, > yes, Severus Snape I've said before that I think and hope Harry will not survive because I think it will make a better story, but of all the characters in the books the one most likely to die, even more than Voldemort, is Snape. For whatever reason Snape killed Dumbledore, and he must pay for that. It is possible that we readers will feel some sadness when this happens but happen it will. Speaking of Voldemort not dying, you don't suppose he could actually win do you? Boy, that would really stir up the pot! Eggplant From kking0731 at gmail.com Sat Feb 17 17:01:32 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:01:32 -0000 Subject: A Theory On Dumbledore's "Gleam of Triumph" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165097 Kaz: Basically my theory is, what if, having used Harry's blood and now having it run through his own veins, it begins to infect him with feelings he cannot understand or possibly deal with? Snow: Just a tad of canon to support your theory (this happened directly after Voldemort's rebirth using Harry's blood): "Listen to me, reliving family history..." he said quietly, "why, I am growing quite sentimental..." GOF Pg. 646 (U.S. edition) Cheers Snow From Bridellwyn at gmail.com Sat Feb 17 17:12:31 2007 From: Bridellwyn at gmail.com (Bridellwyn Orr) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 11:12:31 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville Longbotttom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165099 > > zgirnius: > Sorry, could you elaborate on the supposed parallels? I can't imagine > two characters in canon who are less similar. > I only meant that they are, in general, weak characters, following other people's lead, (Pettigrew following James and Sirius, and Neville following Harry and Ron.) Both are also not very talented in the arts, but surrond themselves with those that are. *HOWEVER, *I will concede that Neville stands up for himself when it is needed most, such as when he, in the Sorcerer's Stone, refused to allow Harry, Ron, and Hermione out of the dormitory at night without a fight. It is those moments that differ him from Pettigrew, which make all the difference. In short, after thinking it over further, I take back my previous statement. :) Bridellwyn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 17 17:28:45 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:28:45 -0000 Subject: QUIDDITCH THROUGH THE AGES BY KENNILWORTHY WHISP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165100 If anybody would like to discuss this book as it relates to cannon, here are some discussion starters. (and of course feel free to add your questions) 1. "A warning: If you rip, tear, shred, bend, fold, deface, disfigure, smear, smudge, throw, drop, or in any other manner damage, mistreat, or show lack of respect towards this book, the consequences will be as awful as it is within my power to make them. Irma Pince, Hogwarts Librarian" I am always quite skeptical about the theories of Madam Pince being Snape's mother in disguise, but when I read this warning, I was thinking that she does sound a bit like Snape here or does she? Thoughts? 2. Dumbledore wrote the foreword to this book as well and he describes the conversation with Madam Pince, which I found interesting. When he persuades Madam Pince to part ways with one of the copies of the books to reproduce to Muggles, she suggests some alternatives to that such as telling people from Comic Relief U.K. that the library had burned down, or simply **pretending that I had dropped dead without leaving instructions**. Thoughts? 3. Oh, and that Madam Pince per Dumbledore had been known to **add unusual jinxes to the books in her care**. HBP anybody? 4. "Those few Animagi who transform into winged creatures may enjoy flight, but they are a rarity. The witch or wizard who finds him or herself transfigured into a bat may take to the air, but, having a bat's brain, they are sure to forget where they want to go the moment they take flight" Will we see some more flying Animagi in canon besides Rita dearest? 5. I am not very interested in technical developments of the Quidditch itself, but I was curious about something when reading how the existence of Golden Snitch came to the existence. As we all know some guy named Barberus Bragge, who was chief of wizarding council in 1269, brought the cage with the little birdie Golden Snidget to the game of quidditch and promised 150 galleons to the player who will catch the birdie. There was a witch who took pity on poor bird, summoned her and released away from Quidditch field. Poor witch was fined ten galleons and her house was about to be seized, so as she writes her sister she is coming to live with her. You can find the whole letter on the pages 12-13 of the book. I found two things to be interesting. The witch (Madame Rabnott) is happy that she was not turned into horned toad (That makes me think that the mentioning of horned toads in GoF is not accidental) and she is also glad that they did not take the Hipoggriff from her. Does it mean that Hippogriffs are easier to tame than we were lead to believe? Were they more spread as house pets or something in 13th century? 6. Oh, and that was raised in the past on the list, but I may as well mention it again. The invention of the Golden Snitch is credited to the wizard Bowman Right from Godric Hollow. The ancestor of James Potter, maybe? Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 17 17:34:35 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:34:35 -0000 Subject: A Theory On Dumbledore's "Gleam of Triumph" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165101 Kaz wrote: > > I used to believe, before the release of THBP, that however evil LV most definitely was, the main reason for this was due to the rejection by his natural father and the fact that this desertion led, inadvertently or not, to the death of his mother. Although murdering Tom Riddle Snr and his parents is undoubtedly extreme and points to an unbalanced and dangerous individual even Harry is capable of avenging his parents' death by killing the person responsible. > > However THBP showed me that this was not actually the case, perhaps deep down it helped him decide who to murder to attain his first horcrux but vengeance was not what drove him to murder in the first place. Therefore, IMO, Riddle Jnr does not seem to possess normal human emotions in any way. Everything he "feels" is geared towards attaining absolute power and immortality. Carol responds: Thanks for an excellent first post. However, while I agree that Tom Jr. doesn't possess normal human emotions (confirmed by JKR herself, who has stated that he's never known or felt love and that he's irredeemable--I can't remember whether she called him a psychopath or a sociopath, but it was one or the other), I don't agree that he killed his father to make his first Horcrux since 1) he's already committed a murder 2) the other two Riddles were also murdered but the soul bits created by their murders could not have been used for Horcruxes at that time since Tom didn't have enough objects, and 3) the conversation with Slughorn hadn't occurred yet and when it did, he was wearing the ring, which he surely would not have done if it were already a Horcrux. Also, Tom Jr. went to the Gaunts looking for information on his ancestors, not intent on murdering anyone. When Morfin inadvertently informed Tom that the Muggle who lived in the big house on the hill was his father, he Stupefied Morfin and went off to kill his father (and ultimately his grandparents as well). Until that moment, he didn't know where his "filthy Muggle father" lived or even whether he was alive or dead. Tom Jr. took Morfin's ring as a souvenir, just as he took the mouth organ and other objects as a child, but he didn't yet know that a Horcrux was created by splitting your soul and encasing the soul bit in an object (that information was supplied by Slughorn, who in any case didn't tell him the incantation used to encase the soul bit). That he killed his father for revenge, not to split his soul to create a soul bit to encase in a Horcrux is made clear by Voldemort himself, who tells Harry, "You see that house upon the hillside, Potter? My father lived there. My mother, a witch who lived in this village, fell in love with him. But he abandoned her when she told him what she was. . . . He didn't like magic, my father. He left her and returned to his Muggle parents before I was even born, Potter, and she died giving birth to me, leaving me to be raised in a Muggle orphanage . . . but I vowed to find him . . . I revenged myself upon him, that fool who gave me his name, *Tom Riddle*" (GoF Am. ed. 646, ellipses and italics in original). This story turns out to be completely accurate, minus the part about the love potion, which is only a deduction on Dumbledore's part based on Merope's behavior in Bob Ogden's memory, which Voldemort never saw. So the canon evidence we have so far indicates that your first impression was right: Tom murdered his father for revenge. The HBP memory, which I summarized earlier in this post, shows that he didn't know where his father lived until Morfin stupidly provided that information, as well as the information about Slytherin's locket. And he says himself that he killed him for revenge. (Of course, he doesn't mention that he later used the soul bit from his father's murder, and probably those of his grandparents as well, to create Horcruxes, but that doesn't make Horcrux creation the motive behind the murders.) BTW, I'm not sure that "even Harry is capable of avenging his parents' deaths by killing the person responsible," and I'm disturbed by Dumbledore's reference to a desire for vengeance in HBP. After all, Harry is supposed to destroy Voldemort through the power that Voldemort knows not, Love. All that aside, I agree with you that Voldemort is obsessed with obtaining power and immortality, but not that he's incapable of *any* human emotion. We've seen him feeling anger since SS/PS. He feels happiness, causing Harry's scar to hurt just as much as it does when LV feels anger, in OoP when he hears some good news (IIRC, a way to use Harry to get to the Prophecy). And we see his desire for revenge against Lucius Malfoy via Draco in HBP. The desire to murder the father who deserted his mother, leaving her to die and Tom himself to be raised in a Muggle orphanage. Kaz: > I also believe that in giving Lily Potter chances to save herself he was not showing mercy but merely conducting a sadistic social experiment - would a loving mother sacrifice her child to save her own skin? I think if Lily had done so then she would have been killed anyway with LV taunting her with her sin as she died. > > In short, in the muggle world, he displays all the characteristics adherant to Narcissists and Sociopaths. Carol: Again, I agree that Voldemort, even as a boy, is and was a sociopath, becoming increasingly less human with every transformation. (Even Hagrid thinks there wasn't enough human left in him for him to die at GH.) But I don't think we have sufficient information to determine why he told Lily to stand aside. It may have been nothing more than a desire to have her move out of his way so that he could kill Harry, much as he tells the boy Hagrid to stand aside so he can curse Aragog. (Funny how he expects people to obey him and his will to trump theirs. It's odd, though, that he didn't just curse her. I guess he figured that she was an enemy, an Order member, and if she wouldn't listen, she deserved to die. But I'm just guessing, too.) Other people have argued that LV had some use for Lily, forcing her to use her talents for his side or something to do with Snape or Wormtail, a la Wormtongue and Eowyn in LOTR (an idea I find repugnant), but, again, everyone is just guessing at this point. So I'll just say that I think Voldemort wanted to murder the Prophecy Boy and insure his own immortality, and, secondarily, to use the soul bit to create his last Horcrux if and when he found a suitable object (I think he planned to steal the Sword of Gryffindor, which he had seen in DD's office). Lily was simply in his way, so he offered her the choice (some choice!) of saving herself at the expense of her child or dying if she didn't get out of the way. He didn't realize, of course, that her refusal to save her own life would save Harry's. Kaz: > LV, however, does not possess this ability [to feel human emotions]. He sees the ability to feel as a human weakness that deserves either to be destroyed or, as is more often the case, not even worthy of this - just an obvious failing to be exploited, mocked or derided. > > It was because of this that he underestimated the power of love and because he still has not allowed himself to feel and therefore understand emotions then he is continuing to make that same mistake. Carol: As I said before, he can feel anger, hatred, a desire for revenge, even a perverted kind of happiness or triumph. But he can't feel love, pity, compassion--the gentler emotions that make us human. It's those emotions, not emotions in general, that he regards as weak, IMO. He's a sociopath with the face of a snake, but he's not a robot. > Kaz: > Basically my theory is, what if, having used Harry's blood and now having it run through his own veins, it begins to infect him with feelings he cannot understand or possibly deal with? > > After committing so many attrocities without a second though or ounce of regret imagine how it would feel to begin to experience empathy and guilt.....would an being such as LV be able to handle this? I personally dont think so. > > IMO, it is already starting to become apparent that LV is beginning to show signs of this "weakness". In OP Chapter 36 when LV possesses Harry and tries to taunt DD into killing him, his reaction to Harry's grief at losing Sirius, and basically welcoming death, is very telling; > > "And as Harry's heart filled with emotion, the creature's coils loosened, the pain was gone...." > > Why would LV, who has only shown contempt for emotions thus far, be suddenly afraid or incapable of dealing with them? Surely the LV of the past would have exploited Harry's pain, seized on the chance of fulfilling Harry's wish to die? > > My theory is that, on experiencing Harry's anguish of losing Sirius, LV suddenly felt guilt and remorse....now THAT would scare him wouldnt it? Carol responds: I don't think that LV feels regret or fear when Harry feels a burst of love for Sirius. I think he feels pain, physical pain much like what Harry had been experiencing. And for that reason, I think that Harry will defeat him by forcing him to feel the pain of Love, either by possessing him or forcing him to enter the room with the locked door. Carol, pretty sure that Voldemort represents pure evil, the absence of good (in contrast to Snape and Draco, in whom enough good remains to make their redemption both possible and probable) From Lana.Dorman at Adelphigroup.com Sat Feb 17 17:50:53 2007 From: Lana.Dorman at Adelphigroup.com (kibakianakaya) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:50:53 -0000 Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book/Free passes to characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165102 > Alla: BIG SNIP > And not that I do not do it myself. For example, to go back to > Harry's using Unforgivables. > > As I mentioned in another thread, I honestly do not see **any** sign > of intent on Harry behalf, except to defend himself in bathroom > scene, but I was always surprised why JKR said that Harry did not > have an intent to complete Crucio in OOP. > > I guess it goes back to what I consider her being very unclear on > Dark magic in general and the unforgivables as well ( what kind of > intent is needed, etc), but I always thought that Harry had plenty of > intent to hurt Bella. And I thought that he could have ended up in > Azkaban for that. > > Having said that, I absolutely excuse Harry here because of the pain > he was in, etc. It does not mean though that I would call his action > right, not at all. I am not going to say that there is any sound > reason for him to do so, except the pain he was in, but this **is** > an excuse. > Lilygale: I'm responding to the idea of "intent" just to make the point that intent is a multi-layered thing. Taking the neo-Freudian view, our intentions come from our conscious (ego) but also unconscious elements (the "Dark Side" id and the "Light Side" superego, to oversimplify shamelessly). In OotP, what could JKR mean when she says Harry does not really want to use Crucio? My (neo-Freudian) interpretation is that Harry really and truly has an instinctive, id-driven desire to hurt Bellatrix in retaliation for killing Sirius. At the same time (and this is what determines Harry's moral stance), his ego and superego restrain his behavior by tempering his emotions. That is, Harry's sense of self and sense of morality will not allow his id to act with full, infantile emotional force. They hold him back to the extent that, when he casts Crucio to satisfy his id, he also cannot really cause harm because his ego/superego will not allow that. Harry wants to hurt, but he could not live with the consequences of that evil. Harry's actions reflect his surface conscious wishes/desires, but he is also controlled by layers underneath, without conscious awareness. In HPB, when Harry's id *may* be more strongly in control (we don't know for sure but perhaps his hatred may be stronger towards Snape than Bellatrix), we as readers are not allowed to see if his ego/superego would overcome his id ? Snape acts as his conscience for by blocking the curses. So how does this neo-Freudian analysis translate to the bathroom scene? Harry thinks of the Prince as his friend and ally. But the Prince has allied himself with Harry's id. The Prince has offered Harry an illusion of superiority (over Snape) by allowing him to get superior grades and high praise in Potions. The Prince has seduced Harry into thinking that offensive spells are OK. (I agree that "for enemies" is most likely interpreted by Harry as an offensive rather than defensive spell). By casting Sectumsempra instead of another known spell, Harry is trusting his "friends" judgment. But why? Because his id really really wants to hurt Draco (Harry's felt that urge for years) ? and he justifies this urge by rationalizing that he can trust his friend. Harry has made a serious error in judgment ? never trust an inanimate object's judgment over your own, to paraphrase Arthur. That error in judgement occurred before the bathroom scene, I believe, in that canon shows us that Harry wanted to try out the spell. In the heat of the moment, Harry was governed by his darker side (id) rather than his ego. It's an understandable error given the heat of the moment, but I agree with others who hope that Harry learns to understand his own impulses and desires more thoroughly. Lilygale who hopes that Harry will achieve the "moral alchemists'" goal, the spiritual equivalent of the Philosopher's Stone. From Vexingconfection at aol.com Sat Feb 17 13:41:45 2007 From: Vexingconfection at aol.com (Vexingconfection at aol.com) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 08:41:45 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Underage wizards Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165103 In a message dated 2/17/2007 8:04:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, bboyminn at yahoo.com writes: >That brings up the question whether the Minstry can >distinguish between underage magic and adult magic. >It is not clear, but I think the /most/ evidence >indicates that they can not. OK-I am new at this-but eager to learn! Having just discover HP books I am in awe of them and those that know them as extensively as this group seems to. That being said, Mundungus disaparated in front of the Dursleys right before the dementor incident, the bang that Harry and the other residents of Privet Drive heard. Since no one came then-wouldn't that be due to adult magic? And the flying car was also magic although it was bewitched by Mr. Weasley and not his children there was still magic in that area-right? But then the MoM didn't send an owl when Dobby aparated or disaparated from the home-only the hover charm.... Someone stop me I am getting headache...so is aparating and disaparating not considered part of the ministry's target watch? The "Hover Charm" was a charm so is there a difference maybe between charms, spells, bewitchments, etc.? And what about all those things Harry did before he knew he was a wizard? His hair grew back from bad hair cuts, he found himself on top of a building, set a snake free, things like that? Thank you all for you tremendous insight-it's been very helpful. Vexies [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Sat Feb 17 18:08:06 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:08:06 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups]Deconstructing the Potterverse In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45D74486.2060100@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165104 eggplant107 wrote: > Historians love revisionism because it's the easiest way to make a > name for yourself; try to show that the villain was really a hero and > the hero was really a villain. But sometimes they take things to > ridiculous levels. Bart: It came from a postmodernist philosophical idea called "deconstructionism", by the recently deceased Jacques Derrida (I used to think that it was a fake name, a pun on "Shock the Reader", but that was his real name; I read too much Harry Potter I guess). The theory was that in any idea, there is a major concept and a contradicting minor concept, and that the major concept wipes out the minor concept. It encourages studying the minor concept. So, for example, deconstructing the Harry Potter novels, we start out by wiping out the major concept: That Voldy is a major villain, that Dumbledore is the leader of the heroes, and Harry Potter is destined to defeat Voldemort. A number of us here have pointed out evidence that Dumbledore is a coldly manipulative bastard, not allowing the suffering of his allies get in the way of his eventual goals. From Hagrid in Book 1, we learn that the official reason why the WW people don't want the muggles to find out about them is that if they did, they would want the WW people to solve all their problems. But, if you take Voldy as the hero, then what is happening is that the people in the WW are forever afraid of being subjugated by the Muggles, and Voldemort wants to free them of staying in hiding by having the WW subjugate the evil Muggles (as typified, of course, by the Dursleys). It has been done; the novel and Broadway show, "Wicked", deconstructing the Wizard of Oz (although mostly the movie, as the novel was an allegory of the Heroic Journey necessary for the protagonists to see that what they were seeking was within themselves, not to mention containing strong esoteric symbology of good and evil which "Wicked" throws away because it would keep the story from working) comes to mind immediately. Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Sat Feb 17 18:12:31 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:12:31 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Underage wizards In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45D7458F.2050707@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165105 vexingconfection wrote: > Why is only some magic used caught by the Ministry of Magic? Didn't > Hermione practice a few spells? Bart: The Ministry of Magic, I think, is supposed to be comparable to the government of the Weimar Republic; well meaning, but so incompetent as to invite revolution (note that both Tommy's and Al's groups are effectively in revolution against the Ministry). Bart From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 17 18:22:16 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 18:22:16 -0000 Subject: QUIDDITCH THROUGH THE AGES BY KENNILWORTHY WHISP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165106 Alla wrote: > If anybody would like to discuss this book as it relates to cannon, here are some discussion starters. (and of course feel free to add your questions) > > 1. "A warning: If you rip, tear, shred, bend, fold, deface, disfigure, smear, smudge, throw, drop, or in any other manner damage, mistreat, or show lack of respect towards this book, the consequences will be as awful as it is within my power to make them. Irma Pince, Hogwarts Librarian" > > I am always quite skeptical about the theories of Madam Pince being Snape's mother in disguise, but when I read this warning, I was thinking that she does sound a bit like Snape here or does she? Thoughts? Carol responds: Cute thread, Alla! We've been needing a new topic. I share your skepticism about Irma Pince being Eileen Prince (they don't even look alike), and Snape, at least as a teenager, was more than a bit guilty of defacing and disfiguring books. (Note Madam Pince's screams at Harry for "befouling" his Potions book, a crime for which the HBP--Severus Snape--is actually guilty. If he were Madam Pince's son, would he dare to deface a book? Snape, at least as a boy, interacts with books, reacting to them by crossing out or underlining or writing in the margins, whereas Madam Pince (who surely can't be the cowering woman in Snape's memory) views them as precious objects to be protected at all costs. I wouldn't be surprised if she's a Slytherin, but her punitive tendencies remind me more of Squib!Filch's desire to punish people who track mud on the floor than of Snape's detentions, which are usually for rule-breaking, failure to follow directions, or disrespect to himself, and which, though unpleasant, are hardly "as awful as it is in [his] power to make them." If he saw a student actually writing potions improvements in his textbook, he'd probably be thrilled. > Alla: > 2. Dumbledore wrote the foreword to this book as well and he describes the conversation with Madam Pince, which I found interesting. When he persuades Madam Pince to part ways with one of the copies of the books to reproduce to Muggles, she suggests some alternatives to that such as telling people from Comic Relief U.K. that the library had burned down, or simply **pretending that I had dropped dead without leaving instructions**. Thoughts? > Carol: I don't know what to make of the "dropped dead without leaving instructions" idea. I think she's merely prepared to tell the hugest possible lies to prevent her beloved books from being read by Muggles. (And what is Dumbledore doing, revealing the existence of the WW to Muggles, anyway? Isn't he violating the Statute of Secrecy by releasing these books? I think it's all in fun. "Comic Relief," after all. She's almost spoofing her own characters.) Alla: > 3. Oh, and that Madam Pince per Dumbledore had been known to **add unusual jinxes to the books in her care**. HBP anybody? Carol: Sounds more like Hermione jinxing the parchment than anything Snape-related to me. (His invented spells, even Muffliato, are related to people, not objects.) And we've already seen the jinxes, or whatever they are, that she's placed on the books in the Restricted Section to make them scream when an unauthorized person touches them. Just because she uses unusual jinxes to protect the books in her care doesn't mean that she invented them or is in any other way like Snape, who hasn't placed any such jinxes that we know of (his Potions book isn't jinxed or Harry couldn't read it. Ron just has trouble deciphering the tiny handwriting. Maybe he should borrow Harry's glasses or use a magnifying glass). > Alla: > 4. "Those few Animagi who transform into winged creatures may enjoy flight, but they are a rarity. The witch or wizard who finds him or herself transfigured into a bat may take to the air, but, having a bat's brain, they are sure to forget where they want to go the moment they take flight" > > Will we see some more flying Animagi in canon besides Rita dearest? Carol: I wouldn't mind having DDM!Snape as a bat Animagus, actually. It would fit all the bat imagery starting from SS/PS. As long as he was a harmless fruit bat and not a vampire bat, of course! Carol, who didn't answer the other questions because she's more interested in current characters than the history of the WW From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 17 18:55:47 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 18:55:47 -0000 Subject: Underage wizards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165107 Vexingconfection wrote: > Mundungus disaparated in front of the Dursleys right before the dementor incident, the bang that Harry and the other residents of Privet Drive heard. Since no one came then-wouldn't that be due to adult magic? And the flying car was also magic although it was bewitched by Mr. Weasley and not his children there was still magic in that area-right? But then the MoM didn't send an owl when Dobby aparated or disaparated from the home-only the hover charm.... Someone stop me I am getting headache...so is aparating and disaparating not considered part of the ministry's target watch? The "Hover Charm" was a charm so is there a difference maybe between charms, spells, bewitchments, etc.? And what about all those things Harry did before he knew he was a wizard? His hair grew back from bad hair cuts, he found himself on top of a building, set a snake free, things like that? Thank you all for you tremendous insight-it's been very helpful. > Vexies Carol: I think that the MoM can detect spells, whether they're charms, hexes, jinxes, curses, countercurses, or Transfiguration spells--i.e., the types of magic usually performed with a wand. (Dobby's Hover Charm, though wandless, is exactly the same spell that a wizard would use even though its wandless, so it registers as a Hover Charm and the MoM assumes that Harry, the only wizard in the area, must have cast it.) Later, when Arthur Weasley and the Order members perform magic in Harry's house, I'm pretty sure that Arthur has permission from his connections at the MoM, the same ones who allowed him to connect the Dursleys' house to the Floo Network, possibly, to bend the rules. (As for the Ton-Tongue Toffees, the Engorgement Charm had already been performed on them at Hogwarts, and they wouldn't be detected. The same is true for the Flying Ford Anglia, which was enchanted by Arthur Weasley at the Burrow. The MoM (and Snape) are later concerned about its being *seen* by Muggles but not about the magic used to fly it.) I don't think that Apparation registers at the MoM, or if it does, the MoM would know that it was being performed by an adult wizard, not Harry. (I don't think it's detectable since it isn't mentioned at Harry's hearing, just as Dobby's Apparation isn't mentioned along with the Hover Charm.) Now granted, JKR isn't absolutely consistent, and her explanations don't always resolve the inconsistencies (for example, how Lily was able to Transfigure teacups or whatever without getting a reprimand), but I think, in general, some areas are watched more closely than others, the MoM can't tell adult magic from underage magic or wizard magic from house-elf magic, and Arthur pulled some strings to allow magic to be performed in Harry's house in GoF and OoP. And, of course, Dumbledore can cover his tracks and conjure dusty bottles of mead or whatever he likes without being detected. Carol, who thinks that possibly Hermione's early experiments registered as a child's accidental magic and were ignored From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sat Feb 17 19:39:24 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 19:39:24 -0000 Subject: QUIDDITCH THROUGH THE AGES BY KENNILWORTHY WHISP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165108 Alla: > I am always quite skeptical about the theories of Madam Pince being > Snape's mother in disguise, but when I read this warning, I was > thinking that she does sound a bit like Snape here or does she? > Thoughts? zgirnius: Snape was a little oddball up to his eyes in the Dark Arts. His reaction to taking an exam, on which he wrote more than anyone else, and that in his small, cramped handwriting, was to go off on jis own to look over the test. I'd bet he spent a lot of time in the library in his student days. Perhaps Madam Pince was a formative influence on his teaching style? > 3. Oh, and that Madam Pince per Dumbledore had been known to **add > unusual jinxes to the books in her care**. HBP anybody? zgirnius: Hmm, yes, perhaps...I still am an "I am a Prince" skeptic. > 4. > The witch (Madame Rabnott) is happy that she was not turned into > horned toad (That makes me think that the mentioning of horned toads > in GoF is not accidental) zgirnius: Do you mean, this indicates that Rowling is aware that a horned toad is a type of lizard? Or do you mean something else? From gold_starrs1 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 17 19:04:20 2007 From: gold_starrs1 at yahoo.com (gold_starrs1) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 19:04:20 -0000 Subject: Help with book HPATST Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165109 That is Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone. I was looking to see if they say any of the teacher's ages. I can't find them or do the tell the ages in this book? gold_starrs1 From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 17 22:14:59 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 22:14:59 -0000 Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book/Free passes to characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165110 > >>Lilygale: > I'm responding to the idea of "intent" just to make the point that > intent is a multi-layered thing. Taking the neo-Freudian view, our > intentions come from our conscious (ego) but also unconscious > elements (the "Dark Side" id and the "Light Side" superego, to > oversimplify shamelessly). > In OotP, what could JKR mean when she says Harry does not really > want to use Crucio? My (neo-Freudian) interpretation is that Harry > really and truly has an instinctive, id-driven desire to hurt > Bellatrix in retaliation for killing Sirius. At the same time (and > this is what determines Harry's moral stance), his ego and superego > restrain his behavior by tempering his emotions. > > In HPB, when Harry's id *may* be more strongly in control (we > don't know for sure but perhaps his hatred may be stronger towards > Snape than Bellatrix), we as readers are not allowed to see if his > ego/superego would overcome his id ? Snape acts as his conscience > for by blocking the curses. > > So how does this neo-Freudian analysis translate to the bathroom > scene? Harry thinks of the Prince as his friend and ally. But the > Prince has allied himself with Harry's id. > Betsy Hp: Fascinating post, Lilygale! It makes sense that the Prince is building up Harry's id, since we know young!Snape was a seething bundle of rage and resentment that made him ripe for Voldemort's picking. But I find it very cool that current day Snape is working to control or check that id. We have the Occlumency lessons speech about "fools wearing their hearts on their sleeves" (to paraphrase) which I think most readers assume is Snape speaking from experience. And in the bathroom Snape comes to clean up the mess made by Harry and the Prince. Not that I'm saying Snape himself is a perfect balance of id and superego. But I do think he might recognize the path Harry is heading down. Hence his ability to so easily counter Harry during their final confrontation in HBP. Snape's been there himself. > >>Lilygale who hopes that Harry will achieve the "moral > alchemists'" goal, the spiritual equivalent of the Philosopher's > Stone. Betsy Hp: Hmm, another thought: could an argument be made that Voldemort is id and Dumbledore superego? That Harry is supposed to achieve the perfect blend of both? Ooh, hey! Another thought: Snape is influencing and shaping Harry's id, and hmm, Lupin I guess(?) is shaping Harry's superego? Yeah, I'm not sure I'm buying that myself. I'll stop while I'm ahead-ish. Betsy Hp From kking0731 at gmail.com Sat Feb 17 23:17:59 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 23:17:59 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165111 Ken snipped: We do not need to consider that Merope "chose" to do anything of the sort in her final days. There likely was no choosing involved if the idea has any merit. It could have been just a random accident quite beyond her control, possibly it happened at her death. These things appear to be quite mysterious after all. Tom get his power from Merope? Certainly not directly, and he certainly did not get his intellect from any recent Gaunt! Whatever gave Tom his unusual ability might never be explained. It would be quite ironic if the true source of his power (but not his Slytherin connection of course) came from a latent magical streak in the Riddles. It seems nearly certain that he owes them his intelligence. We don't know enough to assert or refute dictums on why Lily was a witch or why Tom was so powerful. All we can do is float theories and wait to watch them sink, swim, or drift from view in DH. Snow: I had given this subject point some consideration in the past wondering whether a muggleborn witch is more powerful than a pureblood one. If you look at the characters that possess the greatest powers in the books so far they seem to be the ones who have at least one parent who was a muggle: ? Hermione (said to be "the cleverest witch" of her age Lupin had ever met) ? Lily ("One of the brightest students" Slughorn ever taught) ? Snape (who was "Brilliant" according to Hermione for using Logic rather than magic for his part in protecting the stone) ? Dumbledore? ("is an extremely powerful wizard" according to Snape but we don't know what his parentage is) ? Voldemort (who Snape felt was "highly skilled at Legilimency" in fact young Tom was using a raw version of it on the orphanage kids before he was eleven years old.) ? Myrtle (who was bound to the Castle, after following Olive around harassing her, but was found outside in the lake) On the other hand we have a few purebloods we know are not very gifted: ? Neville (who's "family thought...was all?Muggle for ages") ? Ron (who has never dazzled anyone with his magical skills, he had trouble making a feather fly) ? Crabbe and Goyle (lucky the school even let them in) ? Draco (questionable) Then we have the product of purebloods gone bad, which is a Squib. For being said to be rare, we have two that we are aware of and one off-screen character that is questionable: ? Filtch (who doesn't seem to have any particular strong point at all even for a squib) ? Mrs. Figg's (who also does not appear to have any special aptitude) ? Perkins? (who Arthur Weasley borrowed the tent from for the Quidditch World Cup was furnished and smelled exactly like Mrs. Figg's... coincidence or clue) It appears that the strongest wizards are those who have muggle heritage. Could it be that Salazar Slytherin not only disliked anyone that was not of pure blood heritage but went to the extreme where muggle-borns were concerned (when he kept a creature in the Chamber who's main objective was to seek out and destroy muggle-borns) because he feared how powerful they are? Ken snipped again: Why is it that Tom seems to have no good side, seems never to have had one? Why *did* he choose Harry instead of Neville? Is is *possible* that there is a deeper link between them that no one has suspected yet? Maybe it goes nowhere, yet there seems to be material here to while away a few hours on. Snow: Ken you are amazing! This fits so nicely with what I am saying. Dumbledore said that the reason Voldemort chose Harry was not because he was a pureblood but that he was half-blood like himself. Snow - who feels Ken and a few others can appreciate how even a far- fetched theory can spawn a new avenue of exploration that could actually lead us to a usable puzzle piece ... all theories are important if only for this reason From belviso at attglobal.net Sat Feb 17 23:30:53 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 18:30:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: To the Extreme References: Message-ID: <010701c752eb$ac6dfcf0$fb86400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165112 Snow: I had given this subject point some consideration in the past wondering whether a muggleborn witch is more powerful than a pureblood one. If you look at the characters that possess the greatest powers in the books so far they seem to be the ones who have at least one parent who was a muggle: . Hermione (said to be "the cleverest witch" of her age Lupin had ever met) . Lily ("One of the brightest students" Slughorn ever taught) . Snape (who was "Brilliant" according to Hermione for using Logic rather than magic for his part in protecting the stone) . Dumbledore? ("is an extremely powerful wizard" according to Snape but we don't know what his parentage is) . Voldemort (who Snape felt was "highly skilled at Legilimency" in fact young Tom was using a raw version of it on the orphanage kids before he was eleven years old.) . Myrtle (who was bound to the Castle, after following Olive around harassing her, but was found outside in the lake) On the other hand we have a few purebloods we know are not very gifted: . Neville (who's "family thought...was all-Muggle for ages") . Ron (who has never dazzled anyone with his magical skills, he had trouble making a feather fly) . Crabbe and Goyle (lucky the school even let them in) . Draco (questionable) Magpie: Actually, I don't think it necessarily matters. . Hermione-exceptionally talented had ever met) . Lily -presumably very talented . Snape -very talented . Dumbledore? Parentage completely unknown . Voldemort -very talented . Myrtle - relative magical talent unknown. . Neville-has trouble . Ron - average . Crabbe and Goyle - below average . Draco - seems to do fairly well, at least average James - very talented Sirius - very talented Remus - average or slightly above, but seemingly below James and Sirius Snow: Then we have the product of purebloods gone bad, which is a Squib. For being said to be rare, we have two that we are aware of and one off-screen character that is questionable: Magpie: We don't know that Squibs have to be the offspring of Purebloods and we don't know the parentage of any of the two Squibs we know. Snow: It appears that the strongest wizards are those who have muggle heritage. Could it be that Salazar Slytherin not only disliked anyone that was not of pure blood heritage but went to the extreme where muggle-borns were concerned (when he kept a creature in the Chamber who's main objective was to seek out and destroy muggle-borns) because he feared how powerful they are? Magpie: That would make his prejudice a little more logical, but it unfortunately gets a bit close to simply reversing the prejudice. I suspect the kinds of beliefs held by Slughorn (that Muggleborn blood is inferior) are wrong, and that the opposite belief would be equally wrong. Characters often inherit traits from their parents, but nobody seems bound by their blood when it comes to talent. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 17 23:47:27 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 23:47:27 -0000 Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book/Free passes to characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165113 Lilygale wrote: > I'm responding to the idea of "intent" just to make the point that intent is a multi-layered thing. Taking the neo-Freudian view, our intentions come from our conscious (ego) but also unconscious elements (the "Dark Side" id and the "Light Side" superego, to oversimplify shamelessly). In OotP, what could JKR mean when she says Harry does not really want to use Crucio? Carol responds: I'm not sure what you're referring to her--some remark by the not-always-reliable narrator or Bellatrix's taunt about "You have to mean them [Unforgiveables]?" I've always taken her reamrk to mean that, with regard to the Cruciatus Curse, you have to want to hurt someone in the senes that you enjoy inflicting intense and sustained pain rather than a fleeting desire to punish a real or perceived injustice (sadism vs. righteous anger). With regard to AK and Imperio, respectively, you would have to really want someone dead (which might be one reason why the kids wouldn't be able to give Fake!Moody more than a nosebleed) or really want to control them (rob them of their will and force them to submit to yours--which ought to have been a clue that the teacher forcing them to skip or do acrobatics was not a good man). But it's Bella, not JKR, who says it. (I think, in this instance, Bella knows whereof she speaks, having had to learn the curses herself, and having really mastered Crucio and become a master at it because she's such a saidst.) Lilygale: My (neo-Freudian) interpretation is that Harry really and truly has an instinctive, id-driven desire to hurt Bellatrix in retaliation for killing Sirius. At the same time (and this is what determines Harry's moral stance), his ego and superego restrain his behavior by tempering his emotions. That is, Harry's sense of self and sense of morality will not allow his id to act with full, infantile emotional force. They hold him back to the extent that, when he casts Crucio to satisfy his id, he also cannot really cause harm because his ego/superego will not allow that. Harry wants to hurt, but he could not live with the consequences of that evil. Harry's actions reflect his surface conscious wishes/desires, but he is also controlled by layers underneath, without conscious awareness. Carol: Well, that's one way to look at it, but I'm not sure that JKR had neo-Freudian psychology in mind. I'll grant you that not all intention is conscious (including the intention of the author), but I'm not sure that I find labeling the various elements of the mind all that productive. I think it's simply that, much as he wants to punish Bellatrix in that moment, he can't hold onto the desire to inflict pain as she does (long enough to Crucio the Longbottoms into insanity, with the help of her little gang) because he doesn't enjoy inflicting pain even on an enemy--which is why Crucio is a weapon of Dark Lords and Death Eaters, not of the good guys. The sooner Harry figures that out, the better. I don't think conscience (superego) has anything to do with it, or he'd have figured out by now exactly why he shouldn't use it. > Lilgale: > In HPB, when Harry's id *may* be more strongly in control (we don't know for sure but perhaps his hatred may be stronger towards Snape than Bellatrix), we as readers are not allowed to see if his ego/superego would overcome his id ? Snape acts as his conscience for by blocking the curses. > Carol: Interesting, but again, I'd rather talk about motives and relationships than Freudian categories. Id or no id, Harry's hatred of Snape is already more intense and personal than his hatred of Bellatrix, whom he "knows" only from Dumbledore's memory of her sentencing, and even then he didn't put her name together with that of the Lestranges, a married couple who became DEs (not that thaey were married while they were in Hogwarts, I hope) and who are missing from the graveyard circle (along with the always-overloked Rabastan) until Harry sees their names on the Black family tapestry in OoP. He knows on some level (especially after Bella Crucios Neville in the DoM) that Bellatrix and her cronies Cruciod the Longbottoms into insanity, but her crimes aren't personal to him as they are to Neville, or as personal as Snape's sarcasm and point deductions, which, even before Harry learns that Snape was once a DE, lead him to blame or suspect Snape on every possible occasion. I wouldn't call it "id"--just a very personal (and mutual) hatred and mutual suspicion that intensifies beyond endurance for both parties in HBP. Snape blocks his curses, yes, parrying them when he could easily use Protego to deflect them back onto Harry. Is he Harry's conscience or is he just showing Harry how much Harry still has to learn, that arrogance and a desire for revenge are not what's required to defeat the Dark Lord? I think he's still, for perhaps the last time, in the role of teacher here. Lilygale: > So how does this neo-Freudian analysis translate to the bathroom scene? Harry thinks of the Prince as his friend and ally. But the Prince has allied himself with Harry's id. The Prince has offered Harry an illusion of superiority (over Snape) by allowing him to get superior grades and high praise in Potions. Carol responds: Where do you see a sense of superiority over Snape? I see Harry (ironically) crediting the HBP (Snape) with being a better *teacher* than Snape in both Potions and DADA, but I don't see Harry thinking that he's a better potion maker than either Adult!Snape or the HBP. He knows perfectly well that the potions improvements aren't his own, that he's getting credit he doesn't deserve, that the inventions are the inventions of his new "friend," the Half-Blood Prince. But the illusion of superiority over Snape? He's afraid of Snape's finding out about his Potions book and informing Slughorn that his Potions performance has nothing to do with Lily's genes and everything to do with the notes of some unknown teenage boy from an earlier era. Lilygale: The Prince has seduced Harry into thinking that offensive spells are OK. Carol: But you're crediting an active will to the HBP's notes, written for his own eyes twenty years before. Neither the book itself nor the no-longer extant boy who wrote the notes intended for Harry to read them, however much Harry may think of the book and its author together as a friend who helps him out of tight spots or provides enlightening reading after hours. If Harry is being seduced, it's not by the book but by his own desire to learn and use new hexes and, possibly, to show up Hermione in a class where she's always done better than he has, or, alternatively, to lap up Slughorn's praise and attention, which he can't bring himself to admit he doesn't deserve. On the one hand, he's acting just like James, who would have hexed McLaggen without a second thought; on the other, he's acting like Lupin, who can't bring himself to admit anything that will lessen Dumbledore's regard or trust. Lilygale: (I agree that "for enemies" is most likely interpreted by Harry as an offensive rather than defensive spell). Carol: Considering that he was considering trying it out on McLaggen, not in self-defense but as a James-style punishment for annoying him, I'd say that's a given. Draco was going to use Crucio, the Darkest spell either of them knows next to Avada Kedavra, so an offensive weapon labeled "for enemies" seemed tit for tat (and fully justified) at the time. *Seemed* because, understandably, he wasn't thinking clearly (though, unlike Alla, I think he feared being tortured, not driven to insanity). Lilygale: By casting Sectumsempra instead of another known spell, Harry is trusting his "friends" judgment. But why? Because his id really really wants to hurt Draco (Harry's felt that urge for years) ? and he justifies this urge by rationalizing that he can trust his friend. Harry has made a serious error in judgment ? never trust an inanimate object's judgment over your own, to paraphrase Arthur. That error in judgement occurred before the bathroom scene, I believe, in that canon shows us that Harry wanted to try out the spell. In the heat of the moment, Harry was governed by his darker side (id) rather than his ego. It's an understandable error given the heat of the moment, but I agree with others who hope that Harry learns to understand his own impulses and desires more thoroughly. Carol: I don't know that id or even trusting his friend has anything to do with it. But certainly he chose to hurt Draco rather than use a trie-and-true spell like Expelliarmus or Stupefy. But if he'd *really* wanted to hurt Draco in the sense of Bella-style enjoyment of pain, he'd have been better off using Protego, which would have deflected Draco's Crucio right back onto the caster. Carol, who just picked up her "Trust Snape" sticker (hooray!) From Vexingconfection at aol.com Sat Feb 17 23:59:09 2007 From: Vexingconfection at aol.com (Vexingconfection at aol.com) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 18:59:09 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Underage wizards Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165114 In a message dated 2/17/2007 1:59:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: >And, of course, >Dumbledore can cover his tracks and conjure dusty bottles of mead or >whatever he likes without being detected. Wouldn't Dumbledore be allowed to do such things as he conjured those things in front of a wizards family. They weren't ordinary muggles-they already knew about the wizarding world. Vexingconfection From kazkitten29 at hotmail.co.uk Sun Feb 18 00:05:07 2007 From: kazkitten29 at hotmail.co.uk (Kaz) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 00:05:07 -0000 Subject: A Theory On Dumbledore's "Gleam of Triumph" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165115 >> Snow: > Just a tad of canon to support your theory (this happened directly > after Voldemort's rebirth using Harry's blood): > > "Listen to me, reliving family history..." he said quietly, "why, I am > growing quite sentimental..." GOF Pg. 646 (U.S. edition) > > Cheers > > Snow I am tempted to jump up and down in excitement at that sentence Snow, I'm just dismayed that I always attached an extremely sarcastic tone to it while reading it to my son.... But yes, his digression into his family history seems an odd thing to do for someone who would hate to leave anything open to interpretation of weakness. Thanks, Kaz - who was filled with emotion that her son, although condemning the person LV is, still admitted he felt extremely sorry for him when I read The Secret Riddle chapter in THBP to him this evening. From kazkitten29 at hotmail.co.uk Sat Feb 17 23:57:20 2007 From: kazkitten29 at hotmail.co.uk (Kaz) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 23:57:20 -0000 Subject: A Theory On Dumbledore's "Gleam of Triumph" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165116 Carol: > That he killed his father for revenge, not to split his soul to > create a soul bit to encase in a Horcrux is made clear by Voldemort > himself, who tells Harry, . . . He didn't like magic, my > father. He left her and returned to his Muggle parents before I was > even born, Potter, and she died giving birth to me, leaving me to > be raised in a Muggle orphanage . . . but I vowed to find him . . . > I revenged myself upon him, that fool who gave me his name, *Tom > Riddle*" (GoF Am. ed. 646, ellipses and italics in original). Kaz: Thanks Carol and yep, I stand corrected, my timeline was a little off....I am still not convinced that it was vengeance in an understandable form though....perhaps just avenging what LV saw as a slight towards his greatness? Carol: > All that aside, I agree with you that Voldemort is obsessed with > obtaining power and immortality, but not that he's incapable of > *any* human emotion. We've seen him feeling anger since SS/PS. He > feels happiness, causing Harry's scar to hurt just as much as it > does when LV feels anger, in OoP when he hears some good news > (IIRC, a way to use Harry to get to the Prophecy). And we see his > desire for revenge against Lucius Malfoy via Draco in HBP. The > desire to murder the father who deserted his mother, leaving her to > die and Tom himself to be raised in a Muggle orphanage. Kaz: Again does he actually say that his desire is to kill the man who deserted his mother? Its more like a desire to eradicate anything which would link him to an unextrodinary existence....or, perhaps as simple as destroying the muggle connection to himself? > Kaz: > He sees the ability to feel as a human weakness that deserves > either to be destroyed or, as is more often the case, not even > worthy of this- just an obvious failing to be exploited, mocked or > derided. > It was because of this that he underestimated the power of love and > because he still has not allowed himself to feel and therefore > understand emotions then he is continuing to make that same mistake. > Carol: > As I said before, he can feel anger, hatred, a desire for revenge, > even a perverted kind of happiness or triumph. But he can't feel > love, pity, compassion--the gentler emotions that make us human. > It's those emotions, not emotions in general, that he regards as > weak, IMO. He's a sociopath with the face of a snake, but he's not > a robot. Kaz: Very true Carol, perhaps I should have been more specific....he feels only the darker side of emotion, the very thing that we, as human beings, usually do not encourage within ourselves or others, except in relitavely instinctive small amounts (envy is certainly one of the more frequent ones). It's the extent to which he displays the nastier emotions, and even manages to twist the apparent nicer ones into something hideous that makes me believe it will lead to his downfall. I stand corrected though, it isn't as black and white as LV having NO emotion whatsoever. > Kaz: > Why would LV, who has only shown contempt for emotions thus far, > be suddenly afraid or incapable of dealing with them? Surely the LV > of the past would have exploited Harry's pain, seized on the chance > of fulfilling Harry's wish to die? > > My theory is that, on experiencing Harry's anguish of losing > Sirius, LV suddenly felt guilt and remorse....now THAT would scare > him wouldn't it? > Carol responds: > I don't think that LV feels regret or fear when Harry feels a > burst of love for Sirius. I think he feels pain, physical pain much > like what Harry had been experiencing. And for that reason, I think > that Harry will defeat him by forcing him to feel the pain of Love, > either by possessing him or forcing him to enter the room with the > locked door. Kaz: Hmmmm perhaps, that could certainly be possible I agree, but the question remains that even if LV felt pain why was that the case? He's already demonstrated that he is able to touch Harry once he had regenerated using his blood, hence eliminating that pesky love protection barrier, so why then would he be subjected to pain when Harry's heart filled with emotion? > Carol, pretty sure that Voldemort represents pure evil, the > absence of good (in contrast to Snape and Draco, in whom enough > good remains to make their redemption both possible and probable) Kaz - who absloutely agrees with Carol about Snape and Draco and is going crazy counting down the days to find out their fate! From kking0731 at gmail.com Sun Feb 18 02:30:08 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 02:30:08 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: <010701c752eb$ac6dfcf0$fb86400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165117 Magpie snipped: James - very talented Sirius - very talented Snow: Both of which have been said to be purebloods, right? All I can offer is a quote from JKR's website in rebuttal: Section: F.A.Q. Are all the pure-blood families going to die out? (We've lost the Blacks and the Crouches during the series) Don't forget that, as Sirius revealed in 'Order of the Phoenix', none of these families is really 'pure' ? in other words, they merely cross Muggles and Squibs off the family tree and pretend that they didn't exist. But yes, the number of families claiming to be pure is diminishing. By refusing to marry Muggles or Muggle-borns, they are finding it increasingly difficult to perpetuate themselves. This subject is touched upon in 'Half-Blood Prince'. Magpie snipped: We don't know that Squibs have to be the offspring of Purebloods and we don't know the parentage of any of the two Squibs we know. Snow: My apologies, I'll allow JKR to explain a squib: Section: Extra Stuff SQUIBS I have been asked all sorts of questions about Squibs since I first introduced the concept in `Chamber of Secrets'. A Squib is almost the opposite of a Muggle-born wizard: he or she is a non-magical person born to at least one magical parent. Squibs are rare; magic is a dominant and resilient gene. Magpie snipped: Characters often inherit traits from their parents, but nobody seems bound by their blood when it comes to talent. Snow: Except for squibs, whose parents are magical and yet they don't present themselves with even a bit of non-magical talent. We have known Filtch since the first book and the most I can say for him is that; he really likes his cat; he hates magical kids (or all kids); and he hates to clean up. Mrs. Figg's however, seems to have, at the very least acquired a skill with some type of potions, since the apothecary also smelled the same as her house (and Perkins tent). That's not to say that she has succeeded in producing any results. Then again, she could be the person who exhibits her powers late in life so... If you naturally inherit traits from your parents, via blood, wouldn't you at least exhibit some tendency towards some type of talent? Snow- who thinks that Dumbledore is muggleborn and his brother, Aberforth, is very unlike Petunia and more like Mrs. Figg's who is possibly talented in potions From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Feb 18 02:51:23 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 21:51:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: To the Extreme References: Message-ID: <015701c75307$ae53ea40$fb86400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165118 Magpie snipped: Characters often inherit traits from their parents, but nobody seems bound by their blood when it comes to talent. Snow: Except for squibs, whose parents are magical and yet they don't present themselves with even a bit of non-magical talent. Magpie: Sorry, I meant that being Muggleborn, Halfborn or Pureblood doesn't determine your power as a magician. A squib is limited in having no magic, but he's limited in himself, it's not his bloodline that's limiting him. Squibs don't seem to be exactly Muggles, despite what JKR is saying (though I see her point---they are like the opposite of a Muggleborn), because Squibs seem to have, for instance, a certain affinity for cats. I don't think Figg could brew any Potions at all for the same reason JKR says Muggles can't--at some point you need a wand. She could probably brew the parts that don't require magic. Of course, it's also possible that she *has* Potions for whatever reason. I don't know if Potions work on Squibs or Muggles. I'm not sure what you mean by their showing no non-magical talent. They both seem like capable adults and presumably have some talents even if they're just ordinary people. Snow: If you naturally inherit traits from your parents, via blood, wouldn't you at least exhibit some tendency towards some type of talent? Magpie: I think we do have clear examples of people inheriting talents, looks, or dispositions from their parents. I'm just making a distinction between that type of inheritance (which JKR seems to think is important, or else Harry wouldn't live at the Dursleys and she probably wouldn't have so much juicy family drama!) and something that's more like racism, where your "group" determines how good or bad you'll be. So Harry can inherit his father's talent for Quidditch and his mother's eyes, but it's not like Harry's got to be a talented Wizard because he's not a Pureblood or not a Muggleborn. At least that's the way it seems to work in canon. The believe in the first seems to be held by the good guys and the bad, the second only by the bad. James and Sirius are definitely Purebloods--and I forgot the Twins and Ginny both seem considered by Rowling to be powerful. Also Barty Crouch and Percy were very successful. I have definitely noticed the same pattern you have, that it seems like there's more "ordinary" Purebloods as opposed to extraordinary Halfbloods and Muggle-borns, but I have a feeling that's not supposed to represent a rule. We do also have more ordinary Half-bloods and Muggle-borns, it seems. Snow: Snow- who thinks that Dumbledore is muggleborn and his brother, Aberforth, is very unlike Petunia and more like Mrs. Figg's who is possibly talented in potions Magpie: Isn't Aberforth a Wizard? He was accused of practicing inappropriate Charms on a goat, I thought. (Though that could of course just a rumour!) If Aberforth is Dumbledore's brother and Dumbledore is Muggleborn he couldn't be like Mrs. Figg--she's a Squib. If DD is Muggleborn their parents are Muggles, so Aberforth is either a Muggleborn (if he is a Wizard) or a Muggle (so he probably can't be working in Diagon Alley). He can't be a Squib, because he wouldn't have Wizard parents. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 03:12:12 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 03:12:12 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165119 Snow wrote: > > I had given this subject point some consideration in the past wondering whether a muggleborn witch is more powerful than a > pureblood one. > > If you look at the characters that possess the greatest powers in the books so far they seem to be the ones who have at least one parent who was a muggle: > > On the other hand we have a few purebloods we know are not very gifted: > > ? Neville (who's "family thought...was all?Muggle for ages") > ? Ron (who has never dazzled anyone with his magical skills, he > had trouble making a feather fly) > ? Crabbe and Goyle (lucky the school even let them in) > ? Draco (questionable) Neville was using his father's wand for the first five years and was suffering from lack of confidence. He's at least good in Herbology and not bad in Charms and DADA. I don't think we can fairly judge him from what we've seen so far. Ron is exactly on a par with Harry in every class except DADA, and he made a E in that. Draco made an O in Potions (no help from Snape on the OWL) and is also evidently gifted at Charms considering the flashing badges that he made in GOF ("Support Cedric Diggory, the real Hogwarts champion" changing to "Potter Stinks." He seems to be at least Harry's equal at duelling, considering the shape the bathroom was in (Sectumsempra doesn't count as a higher level of skill any more than an unfinished Crucio does). Draco may not get quite the marks that Hermione does, but she seems to be the only one who does better, at least the only one that Draco or his father mentions.) Snow: > Then we have the product of purebloods gone bad, which is a Squib. > For being said to be rare, we have two that we are aware of and one > off-screen character that is questionable: > > ? Filtch (who doesn't seem to have any particular strong point > at all even for a squib) > ? Mrs. Figg's (who also does not appear to have any special > aptitude) > ? Perkins? (who Arthur Weasley borrowed the tent from for the > Quidditch World Cup was furnished and smelled exactly like Mrs. > Figg's... coincidence or clue) > Carol: I'm not at all sure that a Squib is "the product of purebloods gone bad." As far as we know, it's a witch or wizard with at least one magical parent, regardless of blood line, who somehow failed to inherit a magical gene. (Squibs do seem to have an affinity with cats, even being able to communicate with them. I wouldn't be surprised if Mrs. Figg performs magic at an advanced age. She certainly seems to know a lot *about* it (reading knowledge rather than practical knowledge?). As for Perkins, I always thought, given the smell and decor of the tent, that he bought it secondhand from Mrs. Figg. He's not a Squib, however, or he wouldn't be working for the MoM, even in a department that's not highly regarded. He's "an old warlock named Perkins," according to OoP IIRC). And a warlock, as far as I can determine, is a male wizard. Snow: > It appears that the strongest wizards are those who have muggle heritage. Could it be that Salazar Slytherin not only disliked anyone that was not of pure blood heritage but went to the extreme where muggle-borns were concerned (when he kept a creature in the Chamber who's main objective was to seek out and destroy muggle-borns) because he feared how powerful they are? Carol: I really think you're leaping to conclusions here, especially since we don't know Dumbledore's parentage. And you're forgetting James Potter and Sirius Black. Neither of them is high on my list of favorite characters, but they did become illegal Animagi in their fifth year and help to create the Marauder's Map. And I'd consider the Weasley Twins pretty talented as well. Carol, who, alas, is just an old fuddy duddy with no fondness for far-fetched theories From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 03:17:05 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 03:17:05 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165120 I'd like to approach this discussion in the chronology of the book instead of trying to follow the chronology of the various threads. 1. Harry's consideration and eventual use of Sectumsempra. Let's start with Wynnleafs points: ***************************************************************** In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165014 wynnleaf: Whatever Harry *thought* he was doing, let's get a couple of things straight. 1. If Harry thought Sectumsempra was likely to be a powerful curse to use on real-for-sure, dangerous and deadly enemies, then his recent intention to use it on McClaggen when his back is turned was absolutely horrible, showing all manner of evil intent. 2. If Harry thought Sectumsempra wasn't all that bad, and something he could safely use on someone for whom he had mostly petty irritations (McClaggen), then he was being rather stupid to use it to defend against a crucio. ***************************************************************** Mike: I think you may be ascribing an intent that was not really there. What Harry thinks to himself: "He had still not found out what it did, ... but he was considering trying it out on McLaggen next time he came up behind him unawares." (HBP p.518, US) seems to me to be more of an internal joke than any real intent. I don't think Harry looks upon McLaggen as a real enemy, nor do I think Harry ever intended to try out the spell on him. It doesn't come across to me that Harry was serious, just annoyed with McLaggen. I believe that Harry is well equipped to discern who qualifies as an enemy. I also think that Harry would not be so irresponsible as to use an unknown curse, marked with an ominous note, in a cavalier fashion. I do think that Harry thought the curse was "all that bad" and that he would only use it against a *real* enemy. Although I do agree that the first time to use an unknown curse is not in the middle of a battle. He really should have tried it out on some inanimate object first to see what it did. But, alas, that's not the story JKR wrote. 2. The Battle in the Bathroom < Carol, should we start a campaign to get it renamed the washroom, toilet, restroom, or lavatory ;-)> I'd like to point out some ground rules that JKR has saddled us with in the Potterverse. There are three unforgivable curses, any of which will land you a life term in Azkaban if you are caught using it on a human. Personally, I would have liked to see AKers receive a stiffer sentence than Crucio or Imperio practitioners, but I wasn't asked. Therefore we must assume that *any* of the three are considered the most vile things in the WW and their use marks one as irredeemable. Again, not my choice, it's canon. There's an old joke whose punchline is "Stupid Redneck brings a knife to a gunfight". In this case, the stupid Redneck was Harry. Draco is the one who pulled out the gun, Draco is the one who escalated the fight into the unforgivable curse territory. The punishment for Crutiatus is the same as for killing someone with an Arvada Kedavra in the WW. In this fight I think Alla has it right: ***************************************************************** In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165004 Alla: To me the implications of these arguments is that Draco suffered undeservingly from Harry's curse and that to me means that he is a victim. And if I saw it as anything other than self-defense, then sure Draco would be a victim, I mean he almost bled to death. When it is self defense, then attacker can still be a victim, but a victim of his own actions and that is what Draco to me in this scene. ***************************************************************** Mike: Victim of his own action is exactly right. Draco is the instigator and the elevator of the fight. Any results are on his head, regardless of how bad those results turn out to be. I'll go even further than Alla and step into Eggplant's realm: I have no problem with what Harry did to Draco in this scene. I'm 100% behind her comment: ***************************************************************** In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165024 Eggplant: > Sectusemptra is not the best choice, sure I don't see why you say that, it seemed to work just fine. One of Harry's greatest strengths is that he seems to know instinctively what to do in a emergency situation when there is no time to think about it. Harry did precisely the right thing, and it's an injustice he was punished for it. ***************************************************************** Mike: Draco started the fight, Draco escalated the fight to an unwarranted level. Two boys trying to Stupefy each other or land a Leg-Locker curse is one thing. To attempt a Crucio is all out of proportion to the situation at hand, as well as being criminal in intent. *Any* curse that Harry chose at this moment, short of an unforgivable, is entirely justified and well within his right of self defense. As to the degree of Harry's response, let Betsy wiegh in: ***************************************************************** In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165082 Betsy Hp: Instead of agreeing that, yes slicing someone open is not a good thing to do, folks are trying to say "well it's a bad thing, but since it's Harry I'm cool with it". ***************************************************************** Mike: I guess I'm one of those "cool with it" guys. I believe in measured response. If one has to do a "bad thing" to stop an even worse thing ... so be it. As Alla has said, Harry wasn't going to stop Draco by hugging him. Quite frankly, I'm indifferent about Draco getting cut up. I take the position of 'He got what he deserved', despite what people think is too much retribution. And Harry is horrified at what he has done. Good, I would have expected nothing less from our teenage hero. If I shot and killed someone in self defense I'd imagine that I too would be distraught. But I would much rather be distraught than dead. Does that mean using Sectumsempra wasn't justified? I don't think one follows the other. I much prefer that Harry thwarted Draco's Crucio. Some folks think it was the wrong curse to use. That is a matter for opinion, but does not negate Harry's right to use it. Once Draco brought out his gun, it is not unreasonable for Harry to reach for his knife. 3. The bleeding starts, enter the mean Professor. Let's get one thing out of the way first. Here's Carol: ***************************************************************** In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165011 Carol: Snape is the inventor of the spell that Harry used. He recognized it instantly and knew the counterspell. I doubt that anyone else, including Madam Pomfrey and even Dumbledore himself, could have saved Draco. ***************************************************************** Mike: I firmly believe that Snape used a healing charm not the counter- curse. Once the cuts had occured he had to heal them, he couldn't undo them. That's why he went over them three times, a little more healing with each pass. Dumbledore used the same healing charm in the cave. So I also think that most if not all of the staff could perform this healing charm, most certainly Madam Pomfrey. IOW, I think it was unfortunate for Harry that Snape was the one that turned up, but like you, I don't think it was coincidental. I think Snape had been shadowing Draco one way or the other, all year. After Snape takes care of Draco the interrogation of Harry begins. Let me point out that Snape may have an extra emotion in play here because of the UV. If Draco had died would the second clause of the UV have kicked in and killed Snape? We'll never know, but I tend to think it might have. I'm thinking that Snape is thinking 'Potter, you almost killed two of us'. This might make Snape even more pissed off, if that's possible. ;-) As to Harry's punishment from Snape, let's go to Magpie: ***************************************************************** In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/164947 Magpie: I really don't think Harry was so hard done by after Sectumsempra. Draco got sliced up as a result of his attempted Crucio, so he didn't get off easy. Ironically, Snape doesn't even punish Harry at all for the Sectumsempra, exactly. He says he thinks Harry is a liar and a cheat and deserves detention every Saturday--for his year-long use of the book. ***************************************************************** Mike: Actually, I think that Harry was punished for Sectumsempra, exactly. Oh, he tries to add on to the punishment by forcing Harry to reveal the book. But it didn't work and Snape has no proof other than what he Legilimenced out of Harry, which he can't exactly show to anyone. Had he been able to get the book into play, who knows, he may have pushed for expulsion. The whole thing with the book is to set up an AHA moment for the reader, IMO. Snape, suspecting something since Slughorn's Christmas comments, now knows that Harry has his old book. And Harry now knows that Snape knows, even though Harry doesn't yet know it was Snape's. But the "liar and a cheat" comment is more of a dig, something that Snape can't resist, that confirms that Snape knows about the book, imo. It comes out the same way Snape refers to "your filthy father" when revealing himself as the HBP and inventer of the spells. My reason for this perspective is McGonnagall. Carol brought it up: ***************************************************************** In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165011 Carol: McGonagall makes it clear that she approves of Snape's detentions and that Harry should consider himself lucky that he wasn't expelled. ***************************************************************** Mike: To be clear, McGonnagall told Harry "he was lucky not to have been expelled and that she supported wholeheartedly Snape's punishment". (HBP p.529, US) Would McGonnagall consider the use of an unauthorized book as grounds for expulsion? Especially when that book is not in evidence? I don't see it. Would McGonnagall consider the near death of another student as grounds? Most certainly. Which story do you think Snape gave the staff as the reason for his assigned punishment? 4. Follow through, or rather the lack thereof, by the "adults". It was at this point of the book that I felt, as Magpie puts it, "hard done by" for Harry. The entire staff seems to accept Snapes charges without bothering to find out the "why". Did Harry have some history of greviously injuring other students, even Malfoy? Did that bathroom look like Sectumsempra was the only spell fired off? Who started the festivities? I return to Wynnleaf's capable words: ***************************************************************** In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165014 Whether anyone might have thought Harry was justified in using Sectumsempra against a crucio makes no difference whatsoever, because no one other than Draco and Harry know about the crucio, nor *can* they know. Why -- if Harry himself isn't offering the defence of "he tried to crucio me!" or any defense at all for that matter -- should Snape or anyone else try to "get to the bottom" of the situation and find out what evil thing Draco was doing that would exonnerate Harry? If Harry had been saying he only did it in self-defence, then sure perhaps Snape should have investigated more. But without Harry saying anything, there's no reason to assume it was anything more than a school fight that only turned ugly when Harry used the Sectumsempra. ***************************************************************** Mike: I'm not sure if you are being facetious, but I'll proceed as if you're not. Your point is dead on while at the same time bringing up the question: Why didn't they "get to the bottom" of the matter? Is it Harry's duty to claim self defense to McGonnagall, or is it McGonnagall's duty to make Harry tell his side of the story? Who are the "adults" here? If McGonnagall believed Harry was lucky to have not been expelled, shouldn't she at least have found out if there were mitigating circumstances? Does McGonnagall really believe that Harry was capable of nearly killing someone without justification? It's not my story, so I have no say. But this lack of interest in a reasonable justice system that permeates the WW is very frustrating to me. From the big injustices (Sirius Black's sentence, or rather his internment without a trial) to the little ones like this one for Harry, tend to take away from the credibility of the story for me. Specifically, a society that functions like this couldn't survive in this state for very long much less for a thousand years or more. As Alla says, JMO Mike From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 03:37:48 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 03:37:48 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165121 > Snow: > If you naturally inherit traits from your parents, via blood, > wouldn't you at least exhibit some tendency towards some type of > talent? > > zgirnius: I don't see why this would be. It is certainly not the case in the real world. My father's hair is black, my mother's is brown. I and my sisters inherited our traits, including our hair color, from our parents. One of my sisters has blond hair-no similarity to her parents in this regard. However, I would guess a Squib might be more likely to have a magical child than a random Muggle would. From bawilson at citynet.net Sun Feb 18 03:21:47 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 22:21:47 -0500 Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book/Free passes to characters Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165122 According to what I have read in the literature of psychology and psychiatry, Freud's theories have been pretty well exploded. Hence, I distrust a Freudian or neo-Freudian analysis of anything. Bruce Alan Wilson "The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 04:01:12 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 04:01:12 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165124 Mike wrote: > > > 2. The Battle in the Bathroom < Carol, should we start a campaign to > get it renamed the washroom, toilet, restroom, or lavatory ;-) Carol: Ah, a point we agree on. Heck, I'd settle for "loo." But it's not a bathroom, it's what's called a "toilet" in the earlier books. :-) Mike: > Draco started the fight, Draco escalated the fight to an unwarranted level. Two boys trying to Stupefy each other or land a Leg-Locker curse is one thing. To attempt a Crucio is all out of proportion to the situation at hand, as well as being criminal in intent. *Any* curse that Harry chose at this moment, short of an unforgivable, is entirely justified and well within his right of self defense. Carol: I'm not going to say much about the fight in the, er, restroom, because I've already given my views and we're never going to agree. I'll just repeat that Harry had the means of *disarming* or *knocking out* his opponent, either of which would have been wiser (but less productive for the plot) than using an unknown curse marked "for enemies." That's what DADA--*Defense* against the *Dark Arts* is about. And Harry is the closest thing in his year or maybe among all the students to a DADA expert. What he didn't do, and I can hardly blame him under the circumstances, is *think.* Harry is responsible for his own actions and Draco for his. (And Eggplant, a "he", I believe, is wrong in saying that Harry was punished for using Sectumsempra. He was punished for lying to Snape, who could have asked for his expulsion for using dangerous Dark magic but did not. Carol earlier: > Snape is the inventor of the spell that Harry used. He recognized it > instantly and knew the counterspell. I doubt that anyone else, including Madam Pomfrey and even Dumbledore himself, could have saved Draco. > Mike: > I firmly believe that Snape used a healing charm not the counter- curse. Once the cuts had occured he had to heal them, he couldn't undo them. That's why he went over them three times, a little more healing with each pass. Dumbledore used the same healing charm in the cave. So I also think that most if not all of the staff could perform this healing charm, most certainly Madam Pomfrey. Carol: I firmly believe otherwise, and, if I'm right, that it was fortunate indeed for both boys that Snape showed up. Sectumsempra is his curse; he recognized it instantly; he knew exactly which countercurse to perform. I *don't* think it was "the same" healing spell that DD used in the cave. That was a quick nonverbal spell to heal; a nonmagical cut. Snape used a complicated chant to heal a Dark magical curse whose meaning is not "cut" but "cut always." This is Dark Magic of the sort that Healer!Snape knows how to cure (he ought to, in this instance, as it's his own spell he's healing) and Madam Pomfrey, the school nurse, who has no familiarity with Dark Magic (DD went to Snape, not Madam Pomfrey, for the ring curse), could not have cured him. If it's as simple as any witch or wizard waving a wand over Draco, why would snape refer to the spell as "such Dark magic"? The whole point of the scene (aside from what it reveals about Harry and Draco) is to *show* the special Healing powers that Snape has been credited with offscreen (the ring, the opal necklace) throughout the book, and credited with again just before the tower scene. And what do you mean, "he couldn't undo them"? That's exactly what he did. They healed up instantly. (I think sending Draco to the hospital wing for dittany was as much for his psychological benefit as to prevent scarring. And of course he wanted to separate the boys and leave Harry to sit in the bloody bathroom to think about what he'd done.) *Maybe* he found that complex spell in a book of ancient magic, or maybe he invented it as he invented the countercurse to Levicorpus (Liberacorpus), but I'm betting that no one else in the castle, not even Dumbledore, could have saved Draco. It's a lucky thing for both boys, IMO, that he was tailing Draco. Mike: IOW, I think it was unfortunate for Harry that Snape was the one that turned up, but like you, I don't think it was coincidental. I think Snape had been shadowing Draco one way or the other, all year. Carol: At least we agree that he was tailing Draco. But I think Harry would have been facing expulsion if not Azkaban if anyone but Snape, the Dark Arts expert and inventor of that particular curse, had shown up. And, yes, he was facing the consequences of the UV if Draco died, but I don't see one iota of emotion from him. He acted with remarkable swiftness and calm. Carol, hoping that Draco will feel proper gratitude to Snape for saving him twice in HBP From kking0731 at gmail.com Sun Feb 18 05:00:51 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 05:00:51 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165125 Me (Snow) previously: > I had given this subject point some consideration in the past wondering whether a muggleborn witch is more powerful than a > pureblood one. > > If you look at the characters that possess the greatest powers in the books so far they seem to be the ones who have at least one parent who was a muggle: > > On the other hand we have a few purebloods we know are not very gifted: > > ? Neville (who's "family thought...was all?Muggle for ages") > ? Ron (who has never dazzled anyone with his magical skills, he > had trouble making a feather fly) > ? Crabbe and Goyle (lucky the school even let them in) > ? Draco (questionable) Carol: Neville was using his father's wand for the first five years and was suffering from lack of confidence. He's at least good in Herbology and not bad in Charms and DADA. I don't think we can fairly judge him from what we've seen so far. Ron is exactly on a par with Harry in every class except DADA, and he made a E in that. Draco made an O in Potions (no help from Snape on the OWL) and is also evidently gifted at Charms considering the flashing badges that he made in GOF ("Support Cedric Diggory, the real Hogwarts champion" changing to "Potter Stinks." He seems to be at least Harry's equal at duelling, considering the shape the bathroom was in (Sectumsempra doesn't count as a higher level of skill any more than an unfinished Crucio does). Draco may not get quite the marks that Hermione does, but she seems to be the only one who does better, at least the only one that Draco or his father mentions.) And, Hermione (a muggleborn) does outdo Draco in grades to the point that Lucius scolds Draco for his lack of performance. Snow: I can always depend on you, Carol, to point out discrepancies in my posts, and I quite appreciate it! This is exactly where and why unlikely theories can play their significant roles; persons like yourself, point out any holes in your theory. This is where I have to produce some type of canon to either refute your statements or form some further questionable evidence. You are very good Carol, which is why I appreciate your response, (you make me think, and to a theorist there is no better place to be). On to the subject matter, Neville has a background where he was suspected, very early, of being a muggleborn. Not a squib, since at least one of his parents was magical, but "all-muggle" (is written in my book), which would mean that...? Ron being exactly on par with Harry seems to be a bit over the edge to me...just look at the first flying lesson. Draco got an O in potions and I really don't recall where Snape didn't help him in that. Where is it implied that Snape didn't help Draco and he received this grade on his own? When the Felix Felicis was the award, as far as I recall, Hermione would have been the next in line to achieve the award and not Draco...muggleborn wins again. Me previously: > Then we have the product of purebloods gone bad, which is a Squib. > For being said to be rare, we have two that we are aware of and one > off-screen character that is questionable: > > ? Filtch (who doesn't seem to have any particular strong point > at all even for a squib) > ? Mrs. Figg's (who also does not appear to have any special > aptitude) > ? Perkins? (who Arthur Weasley borrowed the tent from for the > Quidditch World Cup was furnished and smelled exactly like Mrs. > Figg's... coincidence or clue) > Carol: I'm not at all sure that a Squib is "the product of purebloods gone bad." As far as we know, it's a witch or wizard with at least one magical parent, regardless of blood line, who somehow failed to inherit a magical gene. (Squibs do seem to have an affinity with cats, even being able to communicate with them. I wouldn't be surprised if Mrs. Figg performs magic at an advanced age. She certainly seems to know a lot *about* it (reading knowledge rather than practical knowledge?). As for Perkins, I always thought, given the smell and decor of the tent, that he bought it secondhand from Mrs. Figg. He's not a Squib, however, or he wouldn't be working for the MoM, even in a department that's not highly regarded. He's "an old warlock named Perkins," according to OoP IIRC). And a warlock, as far as I can determine, is a male wizard. Snow: Why can't a squib work in Arthur's area of expertise even if he is a non-magical product of a wizard? Arthur has never veered from the truth a bit on occasion.... ;) ...especially for a fellow employee. Me again: > It appears that the strongest wizards are those who have muggle heritage. Could it be that Salazar Slytherin not only disliked anyone that was not of pure blood heritage but went to the extreme where muggle-borns were concerned (when he kept a creature in the Chamber who's main objective was to seek out and destroy muggle-borns) because he feared how powerful they are? Carol: I really think you're leaping to conclusions here, especially since we don't know Dumbledore's parentage. And you're forgetting James Potter and Sirius Black. Neither of them is high on my list of favorite characters, but they did become illegal Animagi in their fifth year and help to create the Marauder's Map. And I'd consider the Weasley Twins pretty talented as well. Snow: The only thing I haven't already responded to would be the twins and I remain bound to my theory that not all Weasley's are Weasley's. Dumbledore's parentage is up for grabs but I would lay odds that he is muggleborn. Carol, who, alas, is just an old fuddy duddy with no fondness for far-fetched theories Snow ? who can't wait for any of the far-fetched theories to come to light..., including Pippin's ESE Lupin From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Feb 18 04:43:13 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 23:43:13 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective References: Message-ID: <018301c75317$4d3412c0$fb86400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165126 > 2. The Battle in the Bathroom < Carol, should we start a campaign to > get it renamed the washroom, toilet, restroom, or lavatory ;-)> > > I'd like to point out some ground rules that JKR has saddled us with > in the Potterverse. There are three unforgivable curses, any of which > will land you a life term in Azkaban if you are caught using it on a > human. Personally, I would have liked to see AKers receive a stiffer > sentence than Crucio or Imperio practitioners, but I wasn't asked. > Therefore we must assume that *any* of the three are considered the > most vile things in the WW and their use marks one as irredeemable. > Again, not my choice, it's canon. Magpie: I actually don't consider this as hard and fast as everyone seems to think. We certainly hear them introduced this way, and they are serious curses. But we've seen them thrown all over the place, including by Harry himself, so I just don't see how we can think of them as a quick trip to Azkaban. Of course, any trip to Azkaban depends on actually completing it, which Draco didn't do, and it's possible he wouldn't have been any more able to complete it than Harry. However that is *not* a statement that's supposed to mean that Harry's own curse is less appropriate. Harry thought he was having one thrown at him, so his reaction counts as a reaction to true Crucio regardless. Mike: > > There's an old joke whose punchline is "Stupid Redneck brings a knife > to a gunfight". In this case, the stupid Redneck was Harry. Draco is > the one who pulled out the gun, Draco is the one who escalated the > fight into the unforgivable curse territory. Magpie: Wizards bring everything--guns, knives, canons, bombs--to every fight. It's more a question of how you get what curse you throw. Harry brings a crucio" to his chase after Snape at the end of the book, but it was just as much of a split second thing as his curse in the bathroom. Harry "brought a gun" to the bathroom as well--his curse is more destructive than the Crucios we've seen cast in canon. Only the Longbottoms sufferred longterm damage from Crucio, and that was an extended session, much as Obliviate charms are used frequently and are even considered harmless, but cause brain damage if used too much over a short time. But again, it's still understood that Harry pulled out his own gun in response to Draco pulling his out and starting to fire first. > Mike: > Victim of his own action is exactly right. Draco is the instigator > and the elevator of the fight. Any results are on his head, > regardless of how bad those results turn out to be. > > I'll go even further than Alla and step into Eggplant's realm: I have > no problem with what Harry did to Draco in this scene. I'm 100% > behind her comment: Magpie: But this is still where the thread runs around in circles, because those of us who are interested in Harry's state of mind really don't care who anyone apportions blame to in the situation. If you see the scene as just Draco getting himself sliced up to the point where Harry might as well be a mirror that Draco stupidly fired Sectumsempra into himself so that it backfired on him, that's fine. We get it. So Harry's intent was to pull out a gun in response to a gun-I agree. (Not pull out a bullet proof vest.) But some of us aren't focused on whose fault it is. We're interested in the idea of Harry pulling out that gun in self-defense. Or actually, when I think about it, I think that's already getting too far back into "don't look at what Harry did!" Because of course, Sectumsempra turns out to be a big, nasty surprise that is deadly, while Crucio is about causing great temporary pain. Harry has had Voldemort himself cast it on him and gotten up to fight. Sectumsempra almost ended in death. Harry didn't know that when he cast it, of course. But some of us are still interested in how Harry deals with the intent he *did* have ("I need a serious curse to use against Draco") coupled with the results that spell turned out to have. And it's frustrating that when we try to talk about this area it's like the Blame Police show up and say, "Hold on, you're talking about the bathroom scene! That means saying it's Malfoy's fault and Harry acted in self-defense and the detentions are unfair and anything other than that is disagreeing with me." > Mike: > I guess I'm one of those "cool with it" guys. I believe in > measured response. If one has to do a "bad thing" to stop an even > worse thing ... so be it. As Alla has said, Harry wasn't going to > stop Draco by hugging him. Quite frankly, I'm indifferent about Draco > getting cut up. I take the position of 'He got what he deserved', > despite what people think is too much retribution. Magpie: Hey, I'm "okay with it" too. I'm not horrified by Harry in the scene. I liked Draco being sliced up (we Draco fans often love our hurt/comfort). And I don't have to pretend Harry was afraid of being insane to be okay with it either, which I don't think he was at all. But I still think there's more to this for Harry's character than that he was justified. In fact, I think the justification he felt and still feels is partly what makes the result of the spell so icky for him. If it was all he needed to feel was justified, Harry would be a lot more like Tom Riddle. Maybe I want to analyze that a bit beyond "Harry's a great kid so of course he feels badly at hurting someone...even if he was totally justified and it was all Malfoy's fault and the detentions are totally unfair!" Mike: > And Harry is horrified at what he has done. Good, I would have > expected nothing less from our teenage hero. If I shot and killed > someone in self defense I'd imagine that I too would be distraught. > But I would much rather be distraught than dead. Does that mean using > Sectumsempra wasn't justified? I don't think one follows the other. I > much prefer that Harry thwarted Draco's Crucio. Some folks and Eggplant> think it was the wrong curse to use. That is a matter > for opinion, but does not negate Harry's right to use it. Once Draco > brought out his gun, it is not unreasonable for Harry to reach for > his knife. Magpie: No, I don't think it is unreasonable. It's almost like I'm *not* arguing that Harry was acting like a psycho monster in this scene. It's almost like I've said he instinctively reached for "the right spell" for what he wanted more than once. Mike: It was at this point of the book that I felt, as Magpie puts it, "hard done by" for Harry. The entire staff seems to accept Snapes charges without bothering to find out the "why". Did Harry have some history of greviously injuring other students, even Malfoy? Did that bathroom look like Sectumsempra was the only spell fired off? Who started the festivities? Magpie: Okay, I'm sorry that JKR did not write the book with the aftermath to Sectumsempra being about Harry's being vindicated and apologized to for having to miss a Quidditch game because he was in detention for almost killing that guy when that guy started it and was going to throw a Crucio. And that the response to the scene from the teachers (since the "justice system" never gets involved) is not to launch an investigation into why he did it. I'm sure Ginny's testimony would have sealed the deal about Harry's being lucky to have something up his sleeve, since she, Hermione and Ron (and possibly others) know about the almost-Crucio from Harry, who isn't keeping that part a secret. But that's not a subject I'm particularly passionate about. When I think about "what the detentions are about" I go by what the detentions were actually about that we saw, and that was Snape rubbing Harry's face in it and Harry hating Snape. Not Harry being made to think about throwing Sectumsempra as if he just threw it at Draco unsuspecting and not to defend himself from Crucio. That could be why for me, the bathroom scene does not automatically lead to the injustice of Harry having to miss a Quidditch game for slicing Draco up. And perhaps also because from what I've read of McGonagall I think she could very well know that Harry thought he was going to be Crucio'd and still feel she ought to back up Saturday detentions just to make it clear exsanguinations are not approved of by the faculty. The WW's justice system is appalling and Harry reacts to it as such. But I don't think this is an example of the Wizarding Justice System gone wrong. Harry's not on trial, nobody's going to jail, teachers don't always have to judge things based on what Harry or we might think is the important issue. It's not anywhere near the worst detention Harry's ever had. The "official" rule for Harry's use of Dark Magic could quite possibly have been expulsion. I assume that's why McGonagall refers to it. Yet Harry's never in danger of being expelled. McG makes a point of saying that he's not going to be. Might that not be because she actually does know Draco after all these years and knows his relationship with Harry and *does* have an idea about self-defense? Or at least feels that there had to be some provocation involved? McG makes a point of how easily Harry's getting off. It's fandom who thinks he's being punished as if he's a murderer. -m From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Feb 18 05:14:01 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 00:14:01 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: To the Extreme References: Message-ID: <01ac01c7531b$9ae4b250$fb86400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165127 Snow: On to the subject matter, Neville has a background where he was suspected, very early, of being a muggleborn. Not a squib, since at least one of his parents was magical, but "all-muggle" (is written in my book), which would mean that...? Magpie: I don't think he was ever suspected of being Muggleborn--that would indicate his family thought he wasn't his parents' son, which is never in question. Is Neville called "all-Muggle" in the first book? Because Squibs haven't been introduced yet, and I would guess JKR used Muggle instead so we'd know what Neville meant. Later he's referred to more as "practically a Squib" I believe (I think by himself). There certainly is a belief in the WW that Muggleborns are inferior. It doesn't seem to conform to reality at all, but it's a known belief. Snow: Ron being exactly on par with Harry seems to be a bit over the edge to me...just look at the first flying lesson. Magpie: I think Carol's referring to grades there, since they had similar OWLS. Harry does have talents that Ron doesn't have, but in many areas they're fairly even. Snow: Draco got an O in potions and I really don't recall where Snape didn't help him in that. Where is it implied that Snape didn't help Draco and he received this grade on his own? Magpie: Carol means that you take your OWLS on your own and they're graded by a committee, so if anyone wanted to claim that Snape gave Draco grades he didn't deserve, he couldn't have on the OWL. Draco's OWL grade indicates his skill on his own. Snow: When the Felix Felicis was the award, as far as I recall, Hermione would have been the next in line to achieve the award and not Draco...muggleborn wins again. Magpie: I don't recall Harry being able to see where every single other person in the class was at (I may not be remembering), but regardless we know that Hermione is the best in her class and has beaten Draco in every exam first year. That doesn't mean Hermione's being Muggleborn is what made her better than Draco. Draco got a better mark on his OWL than Harry, who is Halfblood, but I don't think that proves the "Pureblood wins again." It just means Draco the individual is better in Potions than Harry. Snow: Why can't a squib work in Arthur's area of expertise even if he is a non-magical product of a wizard? Arthur has never veered from the truth a bit on occasion.... ;) ...especially for a fellow employee. Magpie: Though as he's called a warlock seems to indicate he's not a Squib. Snow: The only thing I haven't already responded to would be the twins and I remain bound to my theory that not all Weasley's are Weasley's. Dumbledore's parentage is up for grabs but I would lay odds that he is muggleborn. Magpie: Not all Weasleys are Weasleys? So you mean you have another theory that counters the straightforward idea that the Twins are both very talented and also Weasleys and therefore Purebloods? How do we know any of these people fit their given blood designation then? It seems like we've got as much evidence that some of the Weasleys aren't Weasleys as we have that Draco is really Muggleborn and Hermione's really a Pureblood. -m From kat7555 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 04:55:40 2007 From: kat7555 at yahoo.com (kat7555) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 04:55:40 -0000 Subject: Deconstructing the Potterverse In-Reply-To: <45D74486.2060100@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165128 Bart: > So, for example, deconstructing the Harry Potter novels, we start > out by wiping out the major concept: That Voldy is a major villain, > that Dumbledore is the leader of the heroes, and Harry Potter is > destined to defeat Voldemort. But, if you take Voldy as > the hero, then what is happening is that the people in the WW are > forever afraid of being subjugated by the Muggles, and Voldemort > wants to free them of staying in hiding by having the WW subjugate > the evil Muggles (as typified, of course, by the Dursleys). > It has been done; the novel and Broadway show, "Wicked", > deconstructing the Wizard of Oz (although mostly the movie, as the > novel was an allegory of the Heroic Journey necessary for the > protagonists to see that what they were seeking was within > themselves, not to mention containing strong esoteric symbology of > good and evil which "Wicked" throws away because it would keep the > story from working) comes to mind immediately. I loved Wicked it is one of my favorite books ever. I gained an appreciation for Elphaba that you couldn't get from the movie. I don't think you could use the same technique for the Harry Potter books since Voldemort is so evil. I'd love to read POA from Lupin's point of view or Order of the Phoenix from Sirius' point of view. I feel they are the most important characters in those books along with Harry. I'd also love to read a Harry Potter prequel which would describe events leading up to Harry being left with the Dursleys. Kathy From kking0731 at gmail.com Sun Feb 18 05:42:32 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 05:42:32 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: <01ac01c7531b$9ae4b250$fb86400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165129 Snow: I am sorry; I am a bit tired tonight so this is the last of my replies...early morning tomorrow. Magpie snipped quite a bit: Not all Weasleys are Weasleys? So you mean you have another theory that counters the straightforward idea that the Twins are both very talented and also Weasleys and therefore Purebloods? Snow: Not purebloods! On the contrary, they are the spawn of Molly's brothers, the Prewitts; Fabian and Gideon. The link to this previous thought starts here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/101911 Hopefully this clears up some of where I was coming from. Snow From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 06:09:22 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 06:09:22 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: <018301c75317$4d3412c0$fb86400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165130 > Magpie: > Hey, I'm "okay with it" too. I'm not horrified by Harry in the scene. I > liked Draco being sliced up (we Draco fans often love our hurt/comfort). > And I don't have to pretend Harry was afraid of being insane to be okay with > it either, which I don't think he was at all. Alla: Pretend? I would say that assumption that Harry was horrified that he would become insane after knowing what he was tortured at Graveyard and what happened to Longbottoms has more canon support that he was not. Magpie: > Maybe I want to analyze that a bit beyond "Harry's a great kid so of course > he feels badly at hurting someone...even if he was totally justified and it > was all Malfoy's fault and the detentions are totally unfair!" > Alla: That is your right, but if your analysis reaches a conclusion that Harry had an intent to hurt Draco beyond defending himself against enemy, some people (me) would continue to disagree with that and I do not think I should not do so as well. JMO, Alla From iam.kemper at gmail.com Sun Feb 18 06:40:30 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 22:40:30 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: References: <018301c75317$4d3412c0$fb86400c@Spot> Message-ID: <700201d40702172240u3d2c5af3na478a8d6510375a3@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165131 > Magpie: > > > Maybe I want to analyze that a bit beyond "Harry's a great kid so > of course > > he feels badly at hurting someone...even if he was totally > justified and it > > was all Malfoy's fault and the detentions are totally unfair!" > > > > Alla: > > That is your right, but if your analysis reaches a conclusion that > Harry had an intent to hurt Draco beyond defending himself against > enemy, some people (me) would continue to disagree with that and I > do not think I should not do so as well. > Kemper now: TeenSevie's marginal writing, "For enemies", doesn't suggest a defensive spell. Would one say a shield or bullet-proof vest is 'for enemies'? Since for enemies does not imply defense, it must imply offense. Or so I infer. So, yes, I believe Harry's intent was to hurt Draco. And yes, Draco may have deserved it as he was attempting the Cruiatus. Though, like Harry to Bella, I don't think Draco's righteous anger would've hurt Harry for long. Both Draco and Harry drew guns though Draco would have drawn a pellet gun. Kemper From juli17 at aol.com Sun Feb 18 08:18:45 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 03:18:45 EST Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book/Free passes to characters Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165132 Alla wrote: But what I agree with you is that the amount of scrutiny of good guys is much higher than the character you mentioned. And again, I deeply respect everybody's rights to point out characters ethical mistakes, **every** character mistake, but I do find it amusing when Snape is given free pass for everything starting from his teaching tactics and ending up with murder. IMO of course. Oh and I of course realize that I am making the sweeping generalization, but this is the general impression I get ( not everybody excuses Snape of course). And that is again, their right, but it is also my right to call it an excuse or justification and not a theory supported by canon. For example, if one says that Harry and Snape are **equally** responsible for the hatred they feel for each other, I am not calling it anything else but **excuse**, because the text for me talks about eleven year old thrown in the new world and his lovely teacher attacks him on the very first lesson. Basically any justification of what Snape does to Trio reads to me as an excuse. Julie: I also agree the amount of scrutiny the good guys get over their actions is much higher than the amount of scrutiny the bad (or "grey") guys get over the same or even worse actions. And there is a reason for that. The good guys are the better people, hence their assignation as "good." At least they're supposed to be better. Which is why I hold them to a HIGHER standard. So, Marietta did a bad thing. And Hermione did a not quite as bad thing back. (I say not quite as bad because most posters have agreed that she went too far, which means she did something that can't really be argued as good or neutral, even if her action was provoked.) Equally, Draco did a bad thing in the bathroom, and Harry did a not quite as bad thing back. (Again, most posters have agreed that Harry was reckless to use a spell he didn't understand, thus his action was not good or even neutral--as a lesser blocking spell or hex might have been.) But here's the thing. As a reader I have certain expectations of my heroes. I do NOT have the same expectations of the bad, or grey characters. Of course *they* are going to behave badly. So what? I'm not interested in keeping them from falling into a pit, because they've *already* taken that fall. But I AM interested in my heroes not falling into that slippery pit. Thus, I'm more critical of Harry's actions, and of Hermione's actions, than I am of Draco's, or Marietta's, or Snape's. I believe it was the same thing with McGonagall. She lectured Harry about the bathroom incident, and told him he could have been expelled because *he* is the one whose character matters. What's it to her if Draco ruins his life? She might feel a passing twing of pity for him, but he's not her problem or her concern. For her it's not about Draco, it's about Harry. Let Draco drown kittens, but Harry better not look crossways or she'll be all over him. It's like that old parental saying "I wouldn't do this if I didn't care." I wouldn't criticize Harry, and expect so much more of him, if I didn't care ;-) So, with Harry and Snape, it doesn't really *matter* who is more at fault. It doesn't matter if Snape is twenty, thirty or fifty times more at fault. What matters is who has the integrity, the maturity, and the strength of character to halt the hostilities. Maybe in the end Snape will recognize his own mistakes and misjudgements, or maybe he won't. But Harry *must* recognize his. Because that's what makes him the Hero. Julie, who hopes she explained her position coherently. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Sun Feb 18 08:45:32 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 08:45:32 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165133 > > > Magpie: > > > Hey, I'm "okay with it" too. I'm not horrified by Harry in the > scene. I > > liked Draco being sliced up (we Draco fans often love our > hurt/comfort). > > And I don't have to pretend Harry was afraid of being insane to be > okay with > > it either, which I don't think he was at all. > > Alla: > > Pretend? I would say that assumption that Harry was horrified that > he would become insane after knowing what he was tortured at > Graveyard and what happened to Longbottoms has more canon support > that he was not. > Julie: This seems a bit ingenuous to me. Where does it ever seem that Harry is the least bit afraid of Draco? And why would Harry equate Draco, whom he's just found crying in the bathroom, with Voldemort or the Death Eaters who tortured the Longbottoms? Voldemort and the DEs acted with cold intent in those two scenarios, while Draco is acting off pure emotion, just as Harry was when he tried to crucio Bellatrix in the DoM. And this is Draco, who when he had Harry completely in his power earlier in the year, stomped on Harry's face and broke his nose ("That's for my father"). Ooh, that's some real nasty vengeance there, Draco... I think Harry knew Draco's intent was to temporarily hurt him, not to drive him insane or kill him. And Harry attacked right back, understandably not wanting to experience that hurt, and wanting to turn Draco's attempt to hurt back on him. Only it turned out that Harry's intent and what actually happened weren't in sync. That's what threw him, what scared him, and what he sincerely regretted. And good for him. Julie From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Feb 18 12:01:00 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 12:01:00 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165134 > > 4. Follow through, or rather the lack thereof, by the "adults". > > It was at this point of the book that I felt, as Magpie puts > it, "hard done by" for Harry. The entire staff seems to accept Snapes > charges without bothering to find out the "why". Did Harry have some > history of greviously injuring other students, even Malfoy? Did that > bathroom look like Sectumsempra was the only spell fired off? Who > started the festivities? > > I return to Wynnleaf's capable words: > > ***************************************************************** > In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165014 > > Whether anyone might have thought Harry was justified in using > Sectumsempra against a crucio makes no difference whatsoever, because > no one other than Draco and Harry know about the crucio, nor *can* > they know. Pippin: Of course they can. There was a witness. By the time Harry got around to telling Ron, Ginny and Hermione what happened, "there wasn't much need." Moaning Myrtle saw and heard the whole thing, and she didn't keep quiet about it. "Apparently Moaning Myrtle had taken it upon herself to pop up in every bathroom in the castle to tell the story" --HBP ch24. Why be so sure that McGonagall's lecture didn't include telling Harry that *nothing* justifies the use of Dark Magic against a fellow student? Not even Ginny says that Draco's attempted curse justified what Harry did, she only says that his friends ought to be glad he had something good up his sleeve. She's partisan enough to call a spell that's clearly Dark Magic something good -- but then she didn't see Draco lying on the bathroom floor bleeding to death. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 15:12:54 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 15:12:54 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective/ Now with LONG quote. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165135 > > Alla: > > > > Pretend? I would say that assumption that Harry was horrified that > > he would become insane after knowing what he was tortured at > > Graveyard and what happened to Longbottoms has more canon support > > that he was not. > > > > Julie: > This seems a bit ingenuous to me. Where does it ever seem that > Harry is the least bit afraid of Draco? And why would Harry > equate Draco, whom he's just found crying in the bathroom, > with Voldemort or the Death Eaters who tortured the Longbottoms? > Voldemort and the DEs acted with cold intent in those two > scenarios, while Draco is acting off pure emotion, just as > Harry was when he tried to crucio Bellatrix in the DoM. > And this is Draco, who when he had Harry completely in his > power earlier in the year, stomped on Harry's face and broke > his nose ("That's for my father"). Ooh, that's some real nasty > vengeance there, Draco... > > I think Harry knew Draco's intent was to temporarily hurt him, > not to drive him insane or kill him. And Harry attacked right > back, understandably not wanting to experience that hurt, and > wanting to turn Draco's attempt to hurt back on him. Only it > turned out that Harry's intent and what actually happened > weren't in sync. That's what threw him, what scared him, and > what he sincerely regretted. And good for him. > Alla: Sorry, Julie. It does not seem one bit ingenuious to me.**Never** before Draco attacked Harry with Unforgiveable ( stakes went up for him, just as he never before planned assasination) As to why Harry would equate Draco with Voldemort? Eh, because they threw the same Unforgiveable? Is Harry supposed to know that in the hands of Draco the Unforgiveable would not have that nasty effect? And act accordingly? But I figured that since we had been in the bathroom for several days now, I may as well quote the scene ( it is not exactly to counter anything you said, just good place to do so for me) ""A few days before the match against Ravenclaw, Harry found himself walking down to dinner alone from the common room, Ron having rushed off into a nearby bathroom to throw up yet again, and Hermione having dashed off to see Professor Vector about a mistake she thought she might have made in her last Arithmancy essay. More out of habit than anything, Harry made his usual detour along the seventh-floor corridor, checking the Marauder's Map as he went. For a moment he could not find Malfoy anywhere and assumed he must indeed be inside the Room of Requirement again, but then he saw Malfoy's tiny, labeled dot standing in a boys' bathroom on the floor below, accompanied, not by Crabbe or Goyle, but by Moaning Myrtle. Harry only stopped staring at this unlikely coupling when he walked right into a suit of armor. The loud crash brought him out of his reverie; hurrying from the scene lest Filch turn up, he dashed down the marble staircase and along the passageway below. Outside the bathroom, he pressed his ear against the door. He could not hear anything. He very quietly pushed the door open. Draco Malfoy was standing with his back to the door, his hands clutching either side of the sink, his white-blond head bowed. "Don't," crooned Moaning Myrtle's voice from one of the cubicles. "Don't. . . tell me what's wrong ... I can help you. . . ." "No one can help me," said Malfoy. His whole body was shaking. "I can't do it. ... I can't. ... It won't work . . . and unless 1 do it soon ... he says he'll kill me. ..." And Harry realized, with a shock so huge it seemed to root him to the spot, that Malfoy was crying ? actually crying ? tears streaming down his pale face into the grimy basin. Malfoy gasped and gulped and then, with a great shudder, looked up into flu-cracked mirror and saw Harry staring at him over his shoulder. Malfoy wheeled around, drawing his wand. Instinctively, Harry pulled out his own. Malfoy's hex missed Harry by inches, shattering the lamp on the wall beside him; Harry threw himself sideways, thought Levicorpus! and flicked his wand, but Malfoy blocked the jinx and raised his wand for another ? "No! No! Stop it!" squealed Moaning Myrtle, her voice echoing loudly around the tiled room. "Stop! STOP!" There was a loud bang and the bin behind Harry exploded; Harry attempted a Leg-Locker Curse that backfired off the wall be?hind Malfoy's ear and smashed the cistern beneath Moaning Myr?tle, who screamed loudly; water poured everywhere and Harry slipped as Malfoy, his face contorted, cried, "Cruci ?" "SECTUMSEMPRA!" bellowed Harry from the floor, waving his wand wildly. Blood spurted from Malfoy's face and chest as though he had been slashed with an invisible sword. He staggered backward and collapsed onto the waterlogged floor with a great splash, his wand falling from his limp right hand. "No ?" gasped Harry. Slipping and staggering, Harry got to his feet and plunged toward Malfoy, whose face was now shining scarlet, his white hands scrabbling at his blood-soaked chest. "No ? I didn't ?" Harry did not know what he was saying; he fell to his knees beside Malfoy, who was shaking uncontrollably in a pool of his own blood. Moaning Myrtle let out a deafening scream: "MURDER! MURDER IN THE BATHROOM! MURDER!" The door banged open behind Harry and he looked up, terrified: Snape had burst into the room, his face livid. Pushing Harry roughly aside, he knelt over Malfoy, drew his wand, and traced it over the deep wounds Harry's curse had made, muttering an incantation that sounded almost like song. The flow of blood seemed to ease; Snape wiped the residue from Malfoy's face and repeated his spell. Now the wounds seemed to be knitting. Harry was still watching, horrified by what he had done, barely aware that he too was soaked in blood and water. Moaning Myrtle was still sobbing and wailing overhead. When Snape had performed his countercurse for the third time, he half-lifted Malfoy into a standing position. "You need the hospital wing. There may be a certain amount of scarring, but if you take dittany immediately we might avoid even that.. . . Come...." He supported Malfoy across the bathroom, turning at the door to say in a voice of cold fury, "And you, Potter . . . You wait here for me." It did not occur to Harry for a second to disobey. He stood up slowly, shaking, and looked down at the wet floor. There were bloodstains floating like crimson flowers across its surface. He could not even find it in himself to tell Moaning Myrtle to be quiet, as she continued to wail and sob with increasingly evident enjoyment. Snape returned ten minutes later. He stepped into the bathroom and closed the door behind him. "Go," he said to Myrtle, and she swooped back into her toilet at once, leaving a ringing silence behind her. "I didn't mean it to happen," said Harry at once. His voice echoed in the cold, watery space. "I didn't know what that spell did." But Snape ignored this. "Apparently I underestimated you, Potter," he said quietly. "Who would have thought you knew such Dark Magic? Who taught you that spell?" "I ? read about it somewhere." "Where?" "It was ? a library book," Harry invented wildly. "I can't remember what it was call ?" "Liar," said Snape. Harry's throat went dry. He knew what Snape was going to do and he had never been able to prevent it. ... The bathroom seemed to shimmer before his eyes; he struggled to block out all thought, but try as he might, the Half-Blood Prince's copy of Advanced Potion-Making swam hazily to the forefront of his mind. And then he was staring at Snape again, in the midst of this wrecked, soaked bathroom. He stared into Snape's black eyes, hoping against hope that Snape had not seen what he feared, but ? "Bring me your schoolbag," said Snape softly, "and all of your schoolbooks. All of them. Bring them to me here. Now!" There was no point arguing. Harry turned at once and splashed out of the bathroom. Once in the corridor, he broke into a run toward Gryffindor Tower. Most people were walking the other way; they gaped at him, drenched in water and blood, but he answered none of the questions fired at him as he ran past. " > Magpie: > I actually don't consider this as hard and fast as everyone seems to think. > We certainly hear them introduced this way, and they are serious curses. But > we've seen them thrown all over the place, including by Harry himself, so I > just don't see how we can think of them as a quick trip to Azkaban. Of > course, any trip to Azkaban depends on actually completing it, which Draco > didn't do, and it's possible he wouldn't have been any more able to complete > it than Harry. Alla: Thrown all over the place? I seem to remember Harry thrown them twice before that bathroom scene with no adults AFAIR knowing about it. For all I know if anybody knew about it, Harry would have ended up just there. We know that Aurors got special permission to perform them. Hardly seems like thrown all over the place to me. Magpie: > However that is *not* a statement that's supposed to mean that Harry's own > curse is less appropriate. Harry thought he was having one thrown at him, so > his reaction counts as a reaction to true Crucio regardless. Alla: Harry **thought** he was having true Crucio thrown at him? Harry did not let him finish the way I read it, so as far as I know Harry has himself to thank for that he responded when Draco was still saying the spell and shut him up right away. > Magpie: Only the Longbottoms sufferred longterm damage from > Crucio, and that was an extended session, much as Obliviate charms are used > frequently and are even considered harmless, but cause brain damage if used > too much over a short time. > > But again, it's still understood that Harry pulled out his own gun in > response to Draco pulling his out and starting to fire first. Alla: Since Longbottoms are the **only** victims of longterm Crucio I seem to remember in canon, I'd say they are supposed to be an example of what happens, not an exception to the rule. IMO of course. > Magpie: > So Harry's intent was to pull out a gun in response to a gun-I agree. (Not > pull out a bullet proof vest.) But some of us aren't focused on whose fault > it is. We're interested in the idea of Harry pulling out that gun in > self-defense. Or actually, when I think about it, I think that's already > getting too far back into "don't look at what Harry did!" Because of course, > Sectumsempra turns out to be a big, nasty surprise that is deadly, while > Crucio is about causing great temporary pain. Harry has had Voldemort > himself cast it on him and gotten up to fight. Sectumsempra almost ended in > death. Alla: So, what does that mean if not underrestimating the effects of Unforgiveable? Thanks to Harry, Draco Crucio ended up in nothing, it could have ended totally different. Oh, and yes Harry still fought Voldemort after the Crucio. Harry is also the only person who is still living after AK. I hardly think that is the reason to think that AK effects are less deadly now. JMO, Alla. From davep747 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Feb 18 14:03:52 2007 From: davep747 at yahoo.co.uk (davep747) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 14:03:52 -0000 Subject: Underage wizards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165136 > In a message dated 2/17/2007 1:59:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, > justcarol67 at ... writes: > > >And, of course, > >Dumbledore can cover his tracks and conjure dusty bottles of mead or > >whatever he likes without being detected. > > > Vexingconfection: > Wouldn't Dumbledore be allowed to do such things as he conjured those things > in front of a wizards family. They weren't ordinary muggles-they already > knew about the wizarding world. > > Also think back to the first flying lesson. Draco already knew how to fly. Ginny already knew how to fly since she was stealing her brothers brooms and practicing at age 6 if I remember correctly. But I think there are enchantments that can make magic to be non detectable. Dark Wizards have to practice the Dark Arts at times. They would all be in jail if the MoM could detect all magic. Also as in the case of 12 G.P. If the MoM could detect all magic then they could detect all non plotable places. Davep747 From va32h at comcast.net Sun Feb 18 15:46:31 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 15:46:31 -0000 Subject: To The Extreme (Neville's parentange) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165137 Snow wrote: On to the subject matter, Neville has a background where he was suspected, very early, of being a muggleborn. Not a squib, since at least one of his parents was magical, but "all-muggle" (is written in my book), which would mean that...? va32h here: Both of Neville's parents were Aurors, so I think we can safely assume they are both wizards. A Muggle would make a very bad Auror, don't you think? Also, in CoS, when discussing the merits of magical ability of Muggleborns and purebloods, Ron identifies Neville as a pureblood (although alas, barely able to stand a cauldron the right way up). So why did Neville call himself "nearly all-Muggle in PS" and "practically a Squib" in CoS? Either JKR didn't come up with term "Squib" until she wrote CoS, or didn't want to explain the whole pureblood/mudblood business until CoS. I'd go with the second explanation myself, since Draco Malfoy also conveniently waits until CoS to unleash the "mudblood" slur that sets this whole blood-purity discussion in motion. As for Perkins and the tents smelling like Mrs Figg...I agree that a Squib could be useful in Muggle-Wizard relations, as would the Muggle spouses of wizards, just as an aside. But since we are told Perkins is a warlock...I mean at some point we do have to accept what the author tells us, and not go assuming she means the opposite of everything she says. The tents may smell the same because Mrs. Figg's house, like the magical tents, is a temporary magical dwelling. If Mrs. Figg was "stationed" near Privet Drive when Harry arrived there, I can see Dumbledore or the Ministry putting up a quick home for her. Or maybe Perkins and Figg are cousins. I can't even begin to speak to the Fred-and-George-are-really-Fabian- and-Gideon's sons. My first question would be what it usually is when I read a wild theory For what purpose? How are the themes and motifs of the series enhanced by having Fred and George be Molly's nephews, rather than her sons? Whatever their purpose is in the story - how is it enhanced by having them be revealed as *not* being Weasleys? And how is this going to be suitably explained in a small amount of time in a book that has to encompass the horcrux hunt, destruction of the embodiment of all evil, resolution with Snape, etc and so forth. Many readers insist that enormous plot and character revelations can be credibly revealed in a paragraph or two, but I don't agree. I found the end of GoF, when Crouch Jr. revealed the entire story under Veritaserum, to be most unsatisfying...very cheesy tv detective show in which the crime is explained in the last two minutes before the credits. We have had a six page buildup to whatever secrets Snape has to reveal - and I think that secret (or secrets) will be the only real "revelation" in Deathly Hallows. va32h, who is also a fuddy-duddy, so don't feel badly about it, Carol. From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Feb 18 16:07:45 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 11:07:45 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective References: Message-ID: <002d01c75376$ee1442a0$9c7e400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165138 >> Magpie: > >> Hey, I'm "okay with it" too. I'm not horrified by Harry in the > scene. I >> liked Draco being sliced up (we Draco fans often love our > hurt/comfort). >> And I don't have to pretend Harry was afraid of being insane to be > okay with >> it either, which I don't think he was at all. > > Alla: > > Pretend? I would say that assumption that Harry was horrified that > he would become insane after knowing what he was tortured at > Graveyard and what happened to Longbottoms has more canon support > that he was not. Magpie: I think that's intentionally exaggerating Harry's feelings. He's afraid of Crucio as we've always seen it, he hasn't developed a fear of insanity from it. Crucio's thrown around a lot in the books, including by Harry, and it doesn't mean insanity. Harry's thrown Crucio in the same state of mind as Draco has before and he's never been intending to drive the person insane either. > Magpie: > >> Maybe I want to analyze that a bit beyond "Harry's a great kid so > of course >> he feels badly at hurting someone...even if he was totally > justified and it >> was all Malfoy's fault and the detentions are totally unfair!" >> > > Alla: > > That is your right, but if your analysis reaches a conclusion that > Harry had an intent to hurt Draco beyond defending himself against > enemy, some people (me) would continue to disagree with that and I > do not think I should not do so as well. Magpie: It seems more like going into that first part of the sentence, "Harry had an intent to hurt Draco..." for any reason is too much--if it reaches any conclusion other than Harry is good and it was good Draco got hurt and it doesn't matter that Draco got hurt. As long as one treats Sectumsempra as if it were a stunning spell it's okay. Julie: I believe it was the same thing with McGonagall. She lectured Harry about the bathroom incident, and told him he could have been expelled because *he* is the one whose character matters. What's it to her if Draco ruins his life? She might feel a passing twing of pity for him, but he's not her problem or her concern. For her it's not about Draco, it's about Harry. Let Draco drown kittens, but Harry better not look crossways or she'll be all over him. Magpie: I don't think I'd judge McGonagall that harshly. She's a teacher and I don't think she wants any kids falling into a pit. So I doubt she's just given up on Draco and would be fine with him destroying himself--she finds her places to deal with Draco like any other student who's under her care. Snape, as his Head of House, is the one to deal with him on this, though, and Harry's not seeing what was said to him. I would guess Snape read him the riot act too, and probably used his own injuries against him to do it too. For me, I don't think it's always a case of just holding the good guys to a higher standard, though that's part of it. It's also dealing with whatever issues a particular character is dealing with. There's far more things in canon that I would point to and say are being done wrong by Draco than I would be Harry, but they don't always come with an obvious way of improvement since he's a supporting character and we just don't see him the same way. All there is to say about it is "That's bad" with little to say about improvement. And often talking about why the character might be doing such a thing is considered giving the character a free pass anyway, maybe because to understand is to forgive and only good guys earn forgiveness, I don't know. Like with Snape, of course he should grow up and stop picking on a kid half his age because he reminds him of his father, whom he hated. But there's very few scenes in canon where we see any real possibility of Snape learning that, so it's just a given that Snape does this bad thing consistently. Same with Draco's picking on Harry. It's something he does wrong, but to stop it he's probably going to have to deal with different issues first. So when there's a scene where it seems like he might be able to deal with those issues, people pounce on that. Likewise when Snape does stuff that seems like it could be his road to becoming a better person, they pounce on that. More often they're left with thinking about how Harry can deal with the situation better. I'm not saying nobody ever takes the position that the bad guys are right in any situation--that happens all the time. Identifying with a bad guy in a scene is sometimes going to happen, just as identifying with the good guy is, and when it does happen people probably aren't going to be moved by people saying they're identifying wrong. Alla: Thrown all over the place? I seem to remember Harry thrown them twice before that bathroom scene with no adults AFAIR knowing about it. For all I know if anybody knew about it, Harry would have ended up just there. Magpie: So Harry--our hero--has thrown them twice,with no repercussions whatsoever and no thoughts of Azkaban. My point being that a) Harry certainly doesn't consider them so off-limits that he would never throw one himself. He throws them without even thinking about possible life in prison and b) in terms of it driving people crazy, we see it thrown a lot without having that effect--Voldemort uses them all the time, and both Harry and Neville have been hit with them. Draco's attempt to cast it in the bathroom is treated with far more seriousness both in terms of its potential effects and its guarantee of a lifetime in jail than any other Crucio in canon. Alla: Harry **thought** he was having true Crucio thrown at him? Harry did not let him finish the way I read it, so as far as I know Harry has himself to thank for that he responded when Draco was still saying the spell and shut him up right away. Magpie: What's the matter with saying Harry thought he had one being thrown at him? I said, quite reasonably imo, that we have seen a teenaged boy try to throw Crucio and apparently not really "mean it" in the correct way to throw one for real. So the same could have been happening here, and we don't know that Draco was able to cast one. I then went on to say that from Harry's pov it is a real Crucio, period. I said that to specifically avoid this accusation that I'm saying that Harry isn't reacting to getting a real Crucio at him and is supposed to take into consideration that Draco might not be capable--which I am not saying. Why am I not surprised we're back to it anyway? Yes, Harry thought it was a true Crucio. He can't *know* because it wasn't completed and we've seen teenaged boys throw Crucios in the heat of anger and be told they didn't "mean it." My mistake for thinking about what might be going on with Draco for a second, there, as if he's a character too. Alla: Since Longbottoms are the **only** victims of longterm Crucio I seem to remember in canon, I'd say they are supposed to be an example of what happens, not an exception to the rule. IMO of course. Magpie: The Longbottoms are the only victms of *longterm* Crucio. We have plenty of victims of just plain Crucio, which is what most people throw. Why are you leaping to this being a longterm Crucio? The circumstances all indicate otherwise. Plain vanilla Crucio isn't enough for Harry in this scene? Alla: So, what does that mean if not underrestimating the effects of Unforgiveable? Thanks to Harry, Draco Crucio ended up in nothing, it could have ended totally different. Magpie: It could have ended in a blast of great temporary pain for Harry, yes. Alla: Oh, and yes Harry still fought Voldemort after the Crucio. Harry is also the only person who is still living after AK. I hardly think that is the reason to think that AK effects are less deadly now. Magpie: It's possible to OVERestimate the effects of a curse to, which I don't think Harry is doing, since one would think that Harry protecting himself from Crucio was enough. Harry has gotten up after Crucio, so has Neville, so has every single person we've ever seen be Crucio'd except for the Longbottoms who were subjected to Crucio in a different way than its used every other time we see it used, a way that probably required a lot of things that Draco does not have in this scene. Draco's using it the same way Harry uses it. -m From unicornspride at centurytel.net Sun Feb 18 16:24:14 2007 From: unicornspride at centurytel.net (Lana) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 10:24:14 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Underage wizards References: Message-ID: <005f01c75379$3b09e180$2f01a8c0@Lana> No: HPFGUIDX 165139 > >And, of course, > >Dumbledore can cover his tracks and conjure dusty bottles of mead or > >whatever he likes without being detected. > > > Vexingconfection: > Wouldn't Dumbledore be allowed to do such things as he conjured those things > in front of a wizards family. They weren't ordinary muggles-they already > knew about the wizarding world. > > . Lana writes I would assume that it is okay for kids to perform magic under their parents roof in all wizarding families. I can't see that they would be able to tell the difference between one magic and another. Who is to say that mom wasn't casting a spell. I remember reading something the minister said about detecting magical use. They assumed Dobbys magic was Harrys. So that plainly tells us that they cnnot tell who is doing it, just that it is being done. Also, I would assume that it is okay for a parent to teach a child some magic. They are after all their parents and have the right to give them some basic knowledge before sending htem off green to school. We do.. We teach our children to tie their shoes, count to ten, write their name, etc.. why is it not the assumption that it is okay for wizard parents to do the same? Lana [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Sun Feb 18 16:54:10 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 16:54:10 -0000 Subject: To the Extreme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165140 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > > > Snow - who feels Ken and a few others can appreciate how even a far- > fetched theory can spawn a new avenue of exploration that could > actually lead us to a usable puzzle piece ... all theories are > important if only for this reason > Ken: Yes, that is the essence of brainstorming. Even in a real world, real engineering brainstorming session the rule is that no idea is discarded or ridiculed, not even physically impossible ones. Why? Because one idea inspires another, hearing an impossible suggestion will sometimes inspire someone to see a new idea that is possible. On rarer occasions ideas thought to be impossible turn out to be possible, effective, and rather profitable. This kind of speculation obviously does not appeal to everyone. Carol should not consider herself a fuddy-duddy if she doesn't like it. We've done the best we can to call her and the others to join us. They've all tied themselves to the mast though and there is nothing we can do. If the exercise does not amuse you there *is* no point to it. There have been surprises introduced in the plot in the past however. Having not been here that long I have to wonder if any of them were successfully guessed at and how the guessors were received before our lady of the blessed canon put her seal of approval on them? A likely example would be horcruxes. Did anyone guess it? Not the name of course, but with the example of the diary and the Russian tale of the magician who hid his soul in some external object did anyone speculate that this could be why Voldemort survived? With a plausible soul container in the diary but one that was obviously "defused" did anyone go on to guess that there would be more than one? If anyone managed to pull that off, how did the canon police treat her/him before HBP? Sincerely hoping none of you take this too seriously as its all meant to be in good fun, Ken PS: I have a dream. In a room are gathered 20 or 30 of my kindred wacky theorists. The floor is littered with crumpled paper. The walls are lined with densely packed flip charts and white boards. The conference table is stacked with pizza boxes. The air is heavy with the smell of coffee and the electric fizz of Jolt Cola. Someone is idly flicking pencils into the ceiling tiles. Slowly it emerges. The answer is that in the end Harry will ... hey! does anyone else think this is an unsual beetle crawling on the window sill? From davep747 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Feb 18 14:21:32 2007 From: davep747 at yahoo.co.uk (davep747) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 14:21:32 -0000 Subject: Seeing gray in a black and white book/Free passes to characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165141 Betsy Hp: > But I do agree that there's a lack of equality in the judgement of > characters. The good guys can do something completely cowardly and > ignoble (like say, an adult attacking a child because he doesn't like > what that child's father just said, yes I'm looking at you Hagrid) > and everyone talks about how gosh darn funny it was. And a bad guy > can make the noble decision to not kill an unarmed opponent (Draco vs. > Dumbledore on the Tower) and suddenly it means the non-killer is a > coward. Also, We have seen time and time again that Harry does not tell DD all that he knows. He holds back information that could help him if he only told DD. DD also tells Harry to tell his friends about the what was said to him in the prophecy. He knows that Harry was not going to tell them but said that this was something they need to know. Davep747 From bawilson at citynet.net Sun Feb 18 17:19:28 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 12:19:28 -0500 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165142 Kemper: "Both Draco and Harry drew guns though Draco would have drawn a pellet gun." There have been many people shot and killed by police when they were brandishing a pellet gun or even a toy gun. When someone is brandishing something that LOOKS like a gun, it is best for your own protection and that of any innocent bystanders to shoot first and ask questions later. Perhaps Draco couldn't have pulled off a successful Cruciatus, but can one really expect Harry to wait to find out? Harry knows what a Cruciatus can do; probably the only other student who has any real idea is Neville. Was Sectumsempera excessive? Perhaps. But Harry really hadn't time to analyze and make a measured judgment. Bruce Alan Wilson "The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bawilson at citynet.net Sun Feb 18 17:25:29 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 12:25:29 -0500 Subject: To the Extreme Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165143 "zgirnius: I don't see why this would be. It is certainly not the case in the real world. My father's hair is black, my mother's is brown. I and my sisters inherited our traits, including our hair color, from our parents. One of my sisters has blond hair-no similarity to her parents in this regard. However, I would guess a Squib might be more likely to have a magical child than a random Muggle would." My theory is that there are two sets of genes involved in being a wizard. One set allows one to sense magical energies, the other one allows one to manipulate one. Squibs have only one or the other. If you shake a Muggleborn's family tree hard enough, a Squib or two will fall out. Remember the 18th C. potioner Slughorn mentioned whose last name was "Granger"? I don't think it's unlikely that he had a Squib son who was Hermione's great-great-grandfather or something like that. (And if Mrs. Granger's maiden name turned out to be "Black" or "Malfoy" or "LeStrange". . . . .) Bruce Alan Wilson "The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Feb 18 17:48:33 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 17:48:33 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: <002d01c75376$ee1442a0$9c7e400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165144 Alla: > > Harry **thought** he was having true Crucio thrown at him? Harry did not let him finish the way I read it, so as far as I know Harry has himself to thank for that he responded when Draco was still saying the spell and shut him up right away. Magpie: > What's the matter with saying Harry thought he had one being thrown at him? I said, quite reasonably imo, that we have seen a teenaged boy try to throw Crucio and apparently not really "mean it" in the correct way to throw one for real. Ceridwen: *ducking and donning MOPP suit* I tend to look at the difference between effective and ineffective Cruciatus curses a little differently than I've read elsewhere. To me, when Harry attempts his two Crucios, and when Draco attempts it in the bathroom (why, oh why, couldn't he have chosen the Quidditch pitch???), their tempers are Hot: Quick flare-ups, quick cool-downs. When Bellatrix and other seasoned Cruciatus throwers do them, their tempers are Cold. They mean to inflict pain, so they don't need the heat of anger to do them, they just need the cool of deliberate malice. Draco was already heating up - crying, upset, afraid for himself and his family, and discovered crying by a fellow student. He was too Hot to be cool enough to cast an effective Crucio, in my opinion. Just as Harry was upset and grieving and angry when he attempted to give Bellatrix the same pain he was feeling for Sirius. Alla: > > Since Longbottoms are the **only** victims of longterm Crucio I seem to remember in canon, I'd say they are supposed to be an example of what happens, not an exception to the rule. IMO of course. Magpie: *(snip)* > Plain vanilla Crucio isn't enough for Harry in this scene? Ceridwen: > The Longbottoms were tortured beyond endurance by seasoned Cruciatus pros, reprobates who enjoy torture for its own sake, and in my opinion, who saw their insanity as a pleasant by-product of a successful, drawn-out torture session. Crucios we've seen in canon really have been of the Vanilla variety. Fortunately, we didn't witness the scene with the Longbottoms. I think that showing something like that in a kid-friendly series, even if the kids are growing up with that series, would only lead to a Rocky Road. Alla: > > So, what does that mean if not underrestimating the effects of Unforgiveable? Thanks to Harry, Draco Crucio ended up in nothing, it could have ended totally different. Magpie: > It could have ended in a blast of great temporary pain for Harry, yes. Ceridwen: And, I don't think it could have lasted nearly long enough, even if Draco had been able to cast a successful Cruciatus (which I doubt, see above), because Moaning Myrtle would have had her ten-conniption fit then, too. Even without Myrtle, Harry's own screams would have brought Snape, who seemed to be nearby, running. And even if you think Snape is the king of ESE, he would have to have stopped the casting of an Unforgivable in that setting, or Moaning Myrtle would have broadcast *that* all over the school. Ceridwen, who is not removing the protective clothing until the All Clear sounds. From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Feb 18 18:00:59 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 18 Feb 2007 18:00:59 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 2/18/2007, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1171821659.27.31675.m43@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165145 Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday February 18, 2007 1:00 pm - 1:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Location: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Notes: Just a reminder, Sunday chat starts in about one hour. To get to the HPfGU room follow this link: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Create a user name for yourself, whatever you want to be called. Enter the password: hpfguchat Click "Join Chat" on the lower right. Chat start times: 11 am Pacific US 12 noon Mountain US 1 pm Central US 2 pm Eastern US 7 pm UK All Rights Reserved Copyright 2007 Yahoo! Inc. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 19:47:11 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 19:47:11 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: <018301c75317$4d3412c0$fb86400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165147 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > Mike previously: > > Again, not my choice, it's canon. > > Magpie: > > Of course, any trip to Azkaban depends on actually completing it, > which Draco didn't do, and it's possible he wouldn't have been > any more able to complete it than Harry. > > However that is *not* a statement that's supposed to mean that > Harry's own curse is less appropriate. Harry thought he was having > one thrown at him, so his reaction counts as a reaction to true > Crucio regardless. Mike: I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here. Draco didn't get to complete his curse but that didn't obviate Harry's response? Of course, Harry's curse was the reason Draco didn't get to complete the Crucio. Still not sure what your point is?! As to the degree of "hard and fast" rule, like I said previously, not my choice, it's canon. And who was going to turn in Harry on his Crucio attempts? Bella? Snape, after AKing Dumbledore? > Magpie: > Wizards bring everything--guns, knives, canons, bombs--to every > fight. Mike: It was an analogy, and I thought rather appropriate considering the effects of Sectumsempra. I was commenting on which spells they attempted, not on which ones they *might* have tried. > Magpie: > But again, it's still understood that Harry pulled out his own gun > in response to Draco pulling his out and starting to fire first. Mike: Yep. > Magpie: > But this is still where the thread runs around in circles, because > those of us who are interested in Harry's state of mind really > don't care who anyone apportions blame to in the situation. If you > see the scene as just Draco getting himself sliced up to the point > where Harry might as well be a mirror that Draco stupidly fired > Sectumsempra into himself so that it backfired on him, that's fine. > We get it. > Harry didn't know that when he cast it, of course. But some of us > are still interested in how Harry deals with the intent he *did* > have ("I need a serious curse to use against Draco") coupled with > the results that spell turned out to have. And it's frustrating > that when we try to talk about this area it's like the Blame Police > show up and say, "Hold on, you're talking about the bathroom scene! > That means saying it's Malfoy's fault and Harry acted in self- > defense and the detentions are unfair and anything other than that > is disagreeing with me." Mike: Sorry, I don't think I was ignoring Harry's state of mind. This part was on the dynamics of the fight, Harry's split-second choice to fire off Sectumsempra. But I expected too much, thinking my point was clear. It was fine in my head. :D First off, I agree that Harry was probably not fearing permanent damage a la the Longbottoms. I think Harry has made it clear that he didn't fear Draco. Secondly, I also think the enmity Harry has for the whole Malfoy family was abundantly clear. The raw hatred exhibited after the Quidditch match in OoP spoke volumns to me. The confirmation of Harry's hatred for the Malfoys in Madam Malkin's shop sealed the deal for me. I never thought there was any question that Harry would like nothing more than for the entire Malfoy family to be eradicated. And he wouldn't mind being the impetus for that eradication if the circumstances presented. But Harry is not a vigilante with respect to the Malfoys, he isn't going to be the instigator. So that's the mindset I see Harry having walking into the loo. Once the fight starts, I thought Harry was exhibiting measured responses, like I said before. He may hate Draco, but he didn't have any intent to kill or permanently disfigure. And when Draco begins his Crucio, he has defined himself as an "enemy". As Eggplant pointed out, Harry calls upon the correct spell for the situation, the one marked "for enemies". To me his intent was pure and simple; stop Draco's Crucio. And after rereading his description of the effects of LV's Crucio in GoF, I can see why he would want to avoid that experience at all costs. Harry's mindset has always been transparent, not just for the readers but also for the other characters in the story, imo. It never occurred to me that anyone would have to question where Harry stood. What seemed to be in question in this thread was whether Harry was justified in using Sectumsempra. And I titled it "A Different Perspective". And quite frankly, I resent being referred to as the "Blame Police". I don't think my post, nor anyone elses, is stopping you from framing your discussion in any way that you choose. Nor are you required to join every thread or counter every argument. And if you don't like my conclusions/analysis you are free to respond as you wish, or not respond if you so wish. My choice to focus on different aspects of the discussion does not preclude you from focusing on other aspects. > Magpie: > Hey, I'm "okay with it" too. I'm not horrified by Harry in the > scene. I liked Draco being sliced up (we Draco fans often love our > hurt/comfort). Mike: LOL, can I get you a razor blade? :D > Magpie: > But I still think there's more to this for Harry's character than > that he was justified. In fact, I think the justification he felt > and still feels is partly what makes the result of the spell so > icky for him. If it was all he needed to feel was justified, Harry > would be a lot more like Tom Riddle. Maybe I want to analyze that a > bit beyond "Harry's a great kid so of course he feels badly at > hurting someone...even if he was totally justified and it was all > Malfoy's fault and the detentions are totally unfair!" Mike: I thought you were against setting up Straw Men? Your perspective and mine do not coincide. Your choice for in-depth discussion and mine do not coincide. I find Harry's intent and the after-effects on him to be transparent and rather simple, so I choose not to go there. If you think there is more to the story, if you detect some deep undercurrent of emotion not revealed, go ahead, speak your mind. I don't see it, so I'm not going to. I'm sorry if you feel I'm stifling your discussion. > Magpie: > Okay, I'm sorry that JKR did not write the book with the aftermath > to Sectumsempra being about Harry's being vindicated and apologized > to for having to miss a Quidditch game because he was in detention > for almost killing that guy when that guy started it and was going > to throw a Crucio. And that the response to the scene from the > teachers (since the "justice system" never gets involved) is not to > launch an investigation into why he did it. Mike: Wow, two Straw Men in one response. Launch an investigation? How about "Why did you do it?" Did you get the impression that McGonnagall even asked for Harry's side? I didn't get that. And I know Snape didn't bother with Harry's story. BTW, "justice system" is not confined to the "court system". There is such a thing as an informal justice system and I believe the detention system at Hogwarts qualifies. > Magpie: > That could be why for me, the bathroom scene does not automatically > lead to the injustice of Harry having to miss a Quidditch game for > slicing Draco up. And perhaps also because from what I've read of > McGonagall I think she could very well know that Harry thought he > was going to be Crucio'd and still feel she ought to back up > Saturday detentions just to make it clear exsanguinations are not > approved of by the faculty. Mike: This is what I would have expected from McGonnagall's character, but I didn't see it. JKR could have added the lines "Harry tried to tell McGonnagall about Draco trying to use Crucio, but she stopped him. She told him that she knew what Malfoy tried and it doesn't matter." But she didn't. So what makes you think that McGonnagall made any inquiries? Where in canon do you get the impression that anybody asked Harry for his side, other than Ron, Hermione, and Ginny? As you said above, that's not the story that JKR wrote. > Magpie: > The "official" rule for Harry's use of Dark Magic could quite > possibly have been expulsion. I assume that's why McGonagall refers > to it. Yet Harry's never in danger of being expelled. McG makes a > point of saying that he's not going to be. Might that not be > because she actually does know Draco after all these years and > knows his relationship with Harry and *does* have an idea about > self-defense? Or at least feels that there had to be some > provocation involved? McG makes a point of how easily Harry's > getting off. It's fandom who thinks he's being punished as if > he's a murderer. Mike: McG made a point of telling Harry he was "lucky not to have been expelled". And I'm sure she is aware of the state of the Potter- Malfoy relationship. But, both the self-defense angle and that there is some "official" rule are conjecture not evident in canon. I propose that canon suggests no chance for Harry to plead self- defense. Might Harry had to serve detention anyway? Not the point. The point was that the staff, and specifically McG, don't give Harry the chance to explain himself. The greater point is that the entire WW does not seem to think the accused has the right to present a defense, regardless of whether that defense would exonerate themselves. Think about Harry's trial at the Wizengamut. What chance would a fifteen year old Harry have had if Dumbledore had not been there and arranged for Figgy to present evidence? > Carol: And Eggplant, a "he", I believe, is wrong in saying that Harry was punished for using Sectumsempra. He was punished for lying to Snape, who could have asked for his expulsion for using dangerous Dark magic but did not. Mike: So you think that Snape and McGonnagall both think lying to a teacher is grounds for expulsion? Or rather, do you think the lying offense was the predominant reason for the punishment, taking precedence over causing the near death of another student? Or are you saying that Harry was punished for lying but let off for almost killing Draco? Man, do these people have their priorities screwed up! But Snape has no proof that Harry was lying, and all he would be lying about is his ownership of a book. Does this strike you as grounds McGonnagall would endorse "wholeheartedly" for detention and near expulsion? Sorry, I think McG does not care a whit for the lying part, if she was even told about it, which I'm not sure Snape did. I think McG puts her wholehearted support behind punishment for Harry's near evisceration of Draco. BTW, agree to disagree on the Sectumsempra counter-curse subject. You stated your opinion, I stated mine, and it's not that important to the story. OK :-) Mike, who presented an alternative perspective to give voice to uninvestigated sides of the story. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 20:14:24 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 20:14:24 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective/ Now with LONG quote. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165148 Alla earlier: > > > > > > Pretend? I would say that assumption that Harry was horrified that he would become insane after knowing what he was tortured at Graveyard and what happened to Longbottoms has more canon support that he was not. > > > Julie responded: > > This seems a bit ingenuous to me. Where does it ever seem that Harry is the least bit afraid of Draco? And why would Harry equate Draco, whom he's just found crying in the bathroom, with Voldemort or the Death Eaters who tortured the Longbottoms? > > > > I think Harry knew Draco's intent was to temporarily hurt him, not to drive him insane or kill him. And Harry attacked right back, understandably not wanting to experience that hurt, and wanting to turn Draco's attempt to hurt back on him. Only it turned out that Harry's intent and what actually happened weren't in sync. That's what threw him, what scared him, and what he sincerely regretted. And good for him. > > Alla responded: > > Sorry, Julie. It does not seem one bit ingenuious to me.**Never** before Draco attacked Harry with Unforgiveable ( stakes went up for him, just as he never before planned assasination) > > As to why Harry would equate Draco with Voldemort? Eh, because they threw the same Unforgiveable? Is Harry supposed to know that in the hands of Draco the Unforgiveable would not have that nasty effect? Carol now: I agree to some extent with both of you. I'm not sure that Draco could have thrown an effective Crucio given his state of mind, but Harry, who's pretty sure that Draco is now a Death Eater and has experienced a Crucio firsthand, can hardly be expected to think in those terms. His first instinct should have been to throw a DADA spell, but as Alla says, Draco has just raised the stakes by trying to throw an Unforgiveable, and it's not surprising that he unthinkingly bellows, "SECTUMSEMPRA" or desperately waves his wand around, not knowing what the curse does. However, with the first burst of blood, he ought to have stopped, realizing exactly what "for enemies" meant. And certainly, he's horrified as soon as he realizes what he's done--to his credit, as Julie says. So, yes, it's self-defense, and yes, he's attacking back to avoid being hurt, assuming (rightly or wrongly) that DE!Draco can cast a full-fledged Crucio and not just a few seconds' worth of pain resulting from his own anger at having been caught off-guard in a weak moment by an enemy. But I'm pretty sure that what Harry is anticipating is not insanity but torture. He has survived several Crucios, none of which has driven him insane. He's seen Bellatrix herself, one of the four whose sadistically prolonged Crucios produced insanity in Neville's parents, Crucioing Neville, who also was not driven insane. Let's look at Harry's thoughts when he's actually being Cruciod in GoF and HBP: "The pain was so intense, so all-consuming, that he no longer knew where he was. White-hot knives were piercing every inch of his skin, his head was surely going to burst with pain, he was screaming more loudly than he'd ever screamed in his life" (GoF Am. ed. 661). That's what he has actually experienced (twice) at the hands of Voldemort, and it's what he surely anticipates at the hands of Draco. The fact that Draco is a kid like himself, distraught over the task he's faced with and furious at being discovered in tears, doesn't enter his mind. Draco at that moment is an enemy trying to Crucio him, so the unknown spell labeled "for enemies" pops into his mind. It's not a rational decision, nor is it the "right" decision just because it's Harry's decision (he himself is horrified by his actions, as he would not have been if he'd Stupefied Draco), but it's wholly understandable given his frame of mind. But to say that he anticipates driven insane, as opposed to the excruciating pain for which Crucio is named is, I think, pushing things a bit too far. Granted, when he thinks that Snape is Crucioing him (even after Snape stops the Crucio, he doesn't fully register what has happened), he anticipates death or madness from the pain: "But before he could finish this jinx, excruciating pain hit Harry.; he keeled over in the grass. Someone was screaming; he would surely die of this agony, Snape was going to torture him to death or madness--" (HBP 603). Harry is wrong on all counts, of course. He doesn't die, he isn't driven mad, and it isn't Snape who's torturing him. But this reaction occurs after he sees Snape kill Dumbledore on the tower and is colored by his perception of that event. I doubt very much that he thought *Draco* would kill him or drive him mad. But he didn't doubt that Draco could successfully cast a Crucio that would cause him to suffer excruciating pain. After all, the purpose of a Cruciatus Curse (surely the worst of the Unforgiveables because its use is *never* justified) is to torture. It has no other purpose. The insanity of the Longbottoms is the result of the unnaturally extended use of the curse, not its ordinary use, which is to inflict pain as punishment or to instill fear. Harry grants such a motive to Snape in HBP, but even when Voldemort is actually torturing him in GoF, he only anticipates that his head will burst from pain, not that he'll be driven mad. HBP quoted: > "No one can help me," said Malfoy. His whole body was shaking. "I > can't do it. ... I can't. ... It won't work . . . and unless 1 do it > soon ... he says he'll kill me. ..." > > And Harry realized, with a shock so huge it seemed to root him to > the spot, that Malfoy was crying ? actually crying ? tears streaming > down his pale face into the grimy basin. Malfoy gasped and gulped > and then, with a great shudder, looked up into flu-cracked mirror > and saw Harry staring at him over his shoulder. > > Malfoy wheeled around, drawing his wand. Instinctively, Harry pulled > out his own. Malfoy's hex missed Harry by inches, shattering the > lamp on the wall beside him; Harry threw himself sideways, thought > Levicorpus! and flicked his wand, but Malfoy blocked the jinx and > raised his wand for another ? > > "No! No! Stop it!" squealed Moaning Myrtle, her voice echoing loudly > around the tiled room. "Stop! STOP!" > > There was a loud bang and the bin behind Harry exploded; Harry > attempted a Leg-Locker Curse that backfired off the wall be?hind > Malfoy's ear and smashed the cistern beneath Moaning Myr?tle, who > screamed loudly; water poured everywhere and Harry slipped as > Malfoy, his face contorted, cried, "Cruci ?" > > "SECTUMSEMPRA!" bellowed Harry from the floor, waving his wand > wildly. > > Blood spurted from Malfoy's face and chest as though he had been > slashed with an invisible sword. He staggered backward and collapsed > onto the waterlogged floor with a great splash, his wand falling > from his limp right hand. > > "No ?" gasped Harry. > > Slipping and staggering, Harry got to his feet and plunged toward > Malfoy, whose face was now shining scarlet, his white hands > scrabbling at his blood-soaked chest. > > "No ? I didn't ?" > > Harry did not know what he was saying; he fell to his knees beside > Malfoy, who was shaking uncontrollably in a pool of his own blood. > Moaning Myrtle let out a deafening scream: "MURDER! MURDER IN THE > BATHROOM! MURDER!" > > The door banged open behind Harry and he looked up, terrified: Snape > had burst into the room, his face livid. Pushing Harry roughly > aside, he knelt over Malfoy, drew his wand, and traced it over the > deep wounds Harry's curse had made, muttering an incantation that > sounded almost like song. The flow of blood seemed to ease; Snape > wiped the residue from Malfoy's face and repeated his spell. Now the > wounds seemed to be knitting. > > Harry was still watching, horrified by what he had done, barely > aware that he too was soaked in blood and water. Moaning Myrtle was > still sobbing and wailing overhead. When Snape had performed his > countercurse for the third time, he half-lifted Malfoy into a > standing position. > > > It did not occur to Harry for a second to disobey. He stood up > slowly, shaking, and looked down at the wet floor. There were > bloodstains floating like crimson flowers across its surface. > "I didn't mean it to happen," said Harry at once. His voice echoed > in the cold, watery space. "I didn't know what that spell did." Carol: What I see here is Harry unthinkingly using an unknown spell against a boy he considers an enemy, a boy desperate enough to use Crucio against him, and regretting it afterwards. Had he known that it was Dark magic capable of causing his opponent, even DE!Draco to bleed to death, he would not have used it. (BTW, Mike, please note the word "countercurse" in the quoted text. I still say it's extermely lucky for both boys that Snape, and only Snape, was following Draco.) Magpie: > > Only the Longbottoms sufferred longterm damage from Crucio, and that was an extended session, much as Obliviate charms are used frequently and are even considered harmless, but cause brain damage if used too much over a short time. Alla: > > Since Longbottoms are the **only** victims of longterm Crucio I seem to remember in canon, I'd say they are supposed to be an example of what happens, not an exception to the rule. IMO of course. > Carol: Magpie is right. Crucio caused brain damage only in this one exceptional instance, an unnaturally prolonged Crucio by four DEs against two people. Harry knows from firsthand experience that a short-term Crucio, even when cast by Voldemort himself, causes pain only until the spell is lifted. Intense, horrific pain, yes. But not insanity. The Longbottoms are the exception, not the rule. Carol, not placing blame on Harry, whose desperate act is regrettable but understandable, just saying that Harry's supposed fear of insanity in this instance has no basis in canon From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 21:01:16 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 21:01:16 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165149 > Magpie: > What's the matter with saying Harry thought he had one being thrown at him? > I said, quite reasonably imo, that we have seen a teenaged boy try to throw > Crucio and apparently not really "mean it" in the correct way to throw one > for real. So the same could have been happening here, and we don't know that > Draco was able to cast one. I then went on to say that from Harry's pov it > is a real Crucio, period. I said that to specifically avoid this accusation > that I'm saying that Harry isn't reacting to getting a real Crucio at him > and is supposed to take into consideration that Draco might not be > capable--which I am not saying. Why am I not surprised we're back to it > anyway? Yes, Harry thought it was a true Crucio. He can't *know* because it > wasn't completed and we've seen teenaged boys throw Crucios in the heat of > anger and be told they didn't "mean it." My mistake for thinking about what > might be going on with Draco for a second, there, as if he's a character > too. > Alla: What is **wrong** with saying that Harry thought it was true Crucio? Um, nothing, but by the same token there is nothing wrong with challenging that. To me it looks as true Crucio, pure and simple and I see no signs that Draco would have not be able to complete it. "There was a loud bang and the bin behind Harry exploded; Harry attempted a Leg-Locker Curse that backfired off the wall be?hind Malfoy's ear and smashed the cistern beneath Moaning Myr?tle, who screamed loudly; water poured everywhere and Harry slipped as Malfoy, his face contorted, cried, "Cruci ?" "SECTUMSEMPRA!" bellowed Harry from the floor, waving his wand wildly."" Alla: If there was a time interval, a second, a half-second in between Draco saying it and Harry responding with Sectusemptra, then sure I can see the argument that it was uncomplete one. But Harry shuts Draco up right in the middle of him saying the curse, so I am disagreeing with **Harry thought it was a true Crucio**, yes. I am saying that it **was** true Crucio and Harry did not let him finish. Mike: > Once the fight starts, I thought Harry was exhibiting measured > responses, like I said before. He may hate Draco, but he didn't have > any intent to kill or permanently disfigure. And when Draco begins > his Crucio, he has defined himself as an "enemy". As Eggplant pointed > out, Harry calls upon the correct spell for the situation, the one > marked "for enemies". To me his intent was pure and simple; stop > Draco's Crucio. And after rereading his description of the effects of > LV's Crucio in GoF, I can see why he would want to avoid that > experience at all costs. > > Harry's mindset has always been transparent, not just for the readers > but also for the other characters in the story, imo. It never > occurred to me that anyone would have to question where Harry stood. Alla: Oh, Mike you said everything so much better than I ever could :) I agree with almost every word in your post. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 22:17:31 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 22:17:31 -0000 Subject: Bloodlines and talent (Was: To the Extreme) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165151 Carol earlier: > > Neville was using his father's wand for the first five years and was suffering from lack of confidence. He's at least good in Herbology and not bad in Charms and DADA. I don't think we can fairly judge him from what we've seen so far. Ron is exactly on a par with Harry in every class except DADA, and he made a E in that. Draco made an O in Potions (no help from Snape on the OWL) and is also evidently gifted at Charms considering the flashing badges that he made in GOF ("Support Cedric Diggory, the real Hogwarts champion" changing to "Potter Stinks." Draco may not get quite the marks that Hermione does, but she seems to be the only one who does better, at least the only one that Draco or his father mentions.) > Snow: > > I can always depend on you, Carol, to point out discrepancies in my posts, and I quite appreciate it! This is exactly where and why unlikely theories can play their significant roles; persons like yourself, point out any holes in your theory. This is where I have to produce some type of canon to either refute your statements or form some further questionable evidence. > > You are very good Carol, which is why I appreciate your response, (you make me think, and to a theorist there is no better place to be). Carol: Thanks! > Attributed to Carol: > > And, Hermione (a muggleborn) does outdo Draco in grades to the point that Lucius scolds Draco for his lack of performance. Carol: Oops. I didn't say this. It might be your response to me.(?) Yes, Lucius scolds Draco, but only in relation to being outperformed by a Muggleborn, not in relation to anyone else (Harry, for example). And see my examples above of the marks he apparently earns. (BTW, I forgot to mention that he's in McGonagall's NEWT Transfiguration class, which means he earned at least an E in that OWL. Unfortunately, he's lost interest in mundane things like homework and Quidditch in HBP!) Snow: On to the subject matter, Neville has a background where he was suspected, very early, of being a muggleborn. Not a squib, since at least one of his parents was magical, but "all-muggle" (is written in my book), which would mean that...? Carol responds: But he wasn't suspected of being a Muggleborn. Gran and Uncle Algie know perfectly well who his parents are, and he looks so much like his mother that Harry recognizes Alice Longbottom in a photo before Mad-Eye identifies her. There's no question that Neville is the child of two pureblood wizards, both Aurors (at least according to OoP, if not GoF). It's odd that Neville, a pureblood (identified as such by DD himself), would refer to himself in SS/PS as being possibly "All-Muggle" when he clearly means Squib. Either he doesn't know the term (unlikely) or JKR hadn't invented it yet when she wrote the first book or she thought it was too early to introduce the term in a book where it didn't really play a role. (The concept of "blood" becomes important in CoS, when the Basilisk is petrifying Muggleborns.) But the point of Uncle Algie's dropping Neville out the window, etc., was to determine whether Neville was magical and, luckily for Neville, considering the danger involved in the tests, he was a wizard, not a Squib. > Snow: > Ron being exactly on par with Harry seems to be a bit over the edge to me...just look at the first flying lesson. Carol: I was talking about classes and OWLs, not Quidditch, at which Ron is quite good, or would be if the Twins hadn't damaged his self-confidence, and Harry is a natural, even better than Ron's brother, "the legendary Charlie Weasley." Ron's performance in the first flying lesson is not mentioned; it's Hermione and Neville who have trouble. Just because Harry takes off after Draco, who steals Neville's Remembrall, doesn't mean that Ron can't fly. IIRC, he's already been doing it at home, as has Draco, who is quite good despite holding his broom wrong. > Snow: > Draco got an O in potions and I really don't recall where Snape didn't help him in that. Where is it implied that Snape didn't help Draco and he received this grade on his own? Carol: Magpie already answered this one. Students have no help on their OWLs. Snape was nowhere in sight when Draco earned his O. Besides, it's clear from the first Potions class that Draco is good in the subject; Snape is pointing out how perfectly he's stewed his slugs when Neville melts Seamus's cauldron. > Snow: > When the Felix Felicis was the award, as far as I recall, Hermione would have been the next in line to achieve the award and not Draco...muggleborn wins again. Carol: Do we know that? I'm not sure that we know what Draco was doing--and, as we know, his mind is not on his classes in HBP. But Hermione is not a typical Muggleborn any more than she's a typical student. She values learning, spends more hours studying (and takes more classes) than anyone else. Just because Draco is not quite as good as Hermione doesn't mean that he's not very good. As I said, he must have earned an O on his Potions OWL (like Ernie Macmillan, three other Slytherins, and three Ravenclaws) even to be in that class. Harry and Ron are the only two E students there. I'm not denying that Hermione is a very good student, even without Snape's improved Potions directions, but it's not because she's a Muggleborn. The four Slytherins are either purebloods or Half-Bloods (there are no Muggleborns in Slytherin), Ernie Macmillan is a pureblood who can trace his ancestors back nine generations (yes, of course, there's probably a Muggleborn or Squib before that). We don't know about the Ravenclaws' ancestry, but it really doesn't matter. Hermione's Potions performance is being compared with Harry's when he's using the HBP's Potions book, not with anyone else's. All that's really being proven is that she's not as brilliant at Potions as the Half-Blood Prince, who turns out to be the teenage Snape. Carol earlier: > As for Perkins, I always thought, given the smell and decor of the tent, that he bought it secondhand from Mrs. Figg. He's not a Squib, however, or he wouldn't be working for the MoM, even in a department that's not highly regarded. He's "an old warlock named Perkins," according to OoP IIRC). And a warlock, as far as I can determine, is a male wizard. > > Snow: > > Why can't a squib work in Arthur's area of expertise even if he is a > non-magical product of a wizard? Arthur has never veered from the > truth a bit on occasion.... ;) ...especially for a fellow employee. > Carol again: Considering that the MoM doesn't even know of Mrs. Figg'w existence, I seriously doubt that they'd hire a Squib for any position (except perhaps janitor). Filch is lucky that Dumbledore is headmaster at Hogwarts (until the end of HBP) or he most likely wouldn't have a job. (Both he and Mrs. Figg are under DD's protection, IMO.) If Perkins were a Squib, he wouldn't have a Hogwarts education, and he certainly wouldn't be a "fully qualified wizard" like Mr. Weasley (surely a prequisite for the job). He wouldn't be a wizard at all. In any case, it's canon that he's a warlock (CoS, chapter 4). And a warlock has to mean male wizard (we never see women referred to as warlocks, only as witches, but "wizards" can be used for a mixed group of magical people, as when DD in PoA refers to Harry and Hermione (getting Hermione's age wrong) as "two thirteen-year-old wizards." That warlocks are wizards is indicated by the International Confederation of Warlocks, Dumbledore as Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, and "Madcap Magic for Wacky Warlocks." IOW, a warlock is magical. Perkins is a warlock. Therefore, Perkins is magical and can't be a Squib, regardless of the smell of his tent. (Maybe he bought the tent from Mrs. Figg or they were once married and she changed her name?) I did see a Mrs. Figg/Perkins connection, as did the not-very-observant Harry, but the connection can't be that a warlock is a Squib. It's a contradiction in terms. Snow: > > The only thing I haven't already responded to would be the twins and I remain bound to my theory that not all Weasley's are Weasley's. Dumbledore's parentage is up for grabs but I would lay odds that he is muggleborn. Carol: Erm, uh, I don't know what to say. Not all Wesleys are Weasleys despite the red hair and the physical resemblance between the Twins and Charlie? (In terms of personality, they resemble Ginny.) Despite Mrs. Weasley's Boggart, which includes Harry only because he's an unloved orphan? Where's the canon to support this bit of speculation? (It's not a *theory* unless it can be supported by evidence.) To suggest that they're not purebloods despite canon to the contrary is to weasel out of the argument. (Sorry. I couldn't resist the pun, and I really do think that you're using speculation to support speculation rather than going by the available evidence.) As for Dumbledore, I think he might have been a Half-Blood given his interest in Muggles, but the odds of two Muggleborn brothers, both wizards, are small. The only example in canon is the Creevey brothers. But I'd lay odds that he's a descendant of Godric Gryffindor, given his ownership of the Sword of Gryffindor and a Phoenix whose colors are those of Gryffindor. There's a Godric's Hollow connection as well, probably. BTW, Salazar Slytherin, a pureblood who wanted only purebloods like himself in his House, was quite powerful considering that he built the Chamber of Secrets and placed a Basilisk in it. And saying that Sirius Black and James Potter aren't really purebloods because there aren't any real purebloods is to make the whole discussion pointless. True, the Squibs get burned off the tapestry, but none of them is a direct ancestor of Sirius Black. It's also important, it seems to me, that JKR has her Trio consist of a Pureblood, a Half-Blood, and a Muggleborn. (She also gives them each a different wand core, Harry's being canonically a Phoenix feather and Ron's canonically a unicorn hair, with Hermione's revealed to be dragon heartstring on her website, so that all three of Ollivander's "powerful magical substances" are represented.) I think that JKR's presenting some Muggleborns as talented or powerful serves only to show that the pureblood superiority ethic is false, not to show that Muggleborns are *better* than purebloods. Lily isn't better at magic than James. They're both powerful and talented in their different ways. And Harry, the product of the two, is not weaker than Lily but more powerful than James. His Quidditch talent seems to be inherited directly from his pureblood father. His more unusual gifts, e.g. Parseltongue, are the result of that unfortunate encounter with Lord Voldemort. That he's alive at all is the result of his Muggleborn mother's sacrifice. But he hasn't inherited her talent for Charms or Potions (Slughorn to the contrary regarding Potions) any more than he's an Animagus like his father. Yes, Voldemort chose the Half-Blood like himself over the Pureblood. But that doesn't mean that Voldemort's reasoning is correct or that Half-Bloods are more powerful than Purebloods, with Muggleborns the most powerful of all. It doesn't work that way. Talent and power vary, with Crabbe and Goyle on one end of the Pureblood spectrum and the Crouches, father and son, on the other. (Neville will show that he's no Squib in Book 7, I have no doubt, and Draco may also have a chance to show off his powers, which he's already demonstrated to be above average with his various badges and in the duel with Harry.) It's not that blood prejudice is backwards, with all purebloods being like the inbred Gaunts (my apologies to those who are offended by the stereotype; I didn't put it in the books). It's that the prejudice is baseless, with Muggleborns and Half-Bloods being just as magical as Purebloods, some being more talented than others without regard to blood. Carol, noting that Neville's apparent lack of power and talent stems from childhood trauma that he will need to deal with in Book 7 and not from his genetic heritage From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 18 23:38:57 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 23:38:57 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165153 Carol earleir: > And Eggplant, a "he", I believe, is wrong in saying that Harry was punished for using Sectumsempra. He was punished for lying to Snape, who could have asked for his expulsion for using dangerous Dark magic but did not. > > Mike: > So you think that Snape and McGonnagall both think lying to a teacher is grounds for expulsion? Or rather, do you think the lying offense was the predominant reason for the punishment, taking precedence over causing the near death of another student? Or are you saying that Harry was punished for lying but let off for almost killing Draco? Man, do these people have their priorities screwed up! Carol: No, no, no! Of course I'm not saying that Snape and/or McGonnagall thought Harry deserved to be expelled for lying to a teacher. I'm saying that he could have been expelled for using a curse that nearly killed another student, but Snape apparently didn't even raise the possibility, at least not to Harry. He punished Harry for lying to him, not for defending himself or even for thoughtlessly using a curse he didn't know would nearly kill the other student. McGonagall says that Harry could have been expelled and that she approves of the detentions. She doesn't say why. There's no question that Harry was punished for being "a liar and a cheat," primarily for not telling Snape where he found the curse, which Snape knows perfectly well was in his own Potions book labeled "for enemies." Exactly why Snape punishes him for that offense instead of punishing him for using a Dark curse is unclear. I personally believe that he's protecting both Harry and Draco. He doesn't want either of them expelled because they'd both be in terrible danger from the Dark Lord. But I could be wrong. Maybe Snape just wanted to punish Harry for using his book and his curses and lying about it, but if that were the case, detentions till the end of the year seem a bit extreme. I think Snape also wants to keep his eye on Harry and keep the two boys apart because he knows that Draco has a plan to kill Dumbledore (though he doesn't know about the Vanishing Cabinets) and if by some chance the UV is activated, he wants Harry as far from the scene as possible. But that's only what I think, and I realize that other people have different ideas. Regarding the self-defense plea, Harry did have a chance to make it when Snape first returned from escorting Draco to the hospital wing. Instead of saying, "But Professor! It was self-defense! Malfoy tried to Crucio me!" Harry says, "I didn't mean it to happen. I didn't know what that spell did!" Snape doesn't question that statement. He only asks Harry where he learned such Dark Magic (knowing the answer perfectly well), and Harry lies to him, saying that he found it in a library book. At that point, Snape uses Legilimency, finds what he undoubtedly expected to find, an image of his own NEWT Potions book annotated with his own spells and Potions hints. At that point, what Harry has done becomes worthy of detention because he's lying to a teacher (and Snape knows he's been cheating in Potions all year). The focus changes from the fight and the use of an illegal curse to the HBP's book. Blame JKR, not me. Or blame Snape and Harry for caring about what ought to be a side issue instead of the main concern, a dangerous, Dark magic spell that Harry himself knows that he shouldn't have used. ("I didn't know what it did" is no more an acceptable excuse than "I didn't know the gun was loaded," IMO.) But the point is, Harry is *not* punished for using an illegal curse, much less for defending himself. He's punished for lying to a teacher. And McGonagall, who has heard the whole story from Snape (or so the narrator says) and must know what Moaning Myrtle has been spreading around the whole school as well, sees the punishment as justified. Maybe we should blame JKR. Maybe we should blame the characters for having the wrong priorities. But the fact remains that Harry himself doesn't raise the point or try to justify his use of a horrifying curse that left his opponent swimming in his own blood. He's grateful to Ginny for suggesting that he had "something good up his sleeve," but he himself doesn't think that Sectumsempra was "something good." He defends the HBP for jotting it down ("It's not like he was advising anyone to use it!" 529), but that's because he still thinks of the HBP as the friend without whose advuce on Bezoars Ron would be dead. And he adds, "I'm not defending what I did!" (530). Harry at this point is ashamed of himself for using an unknown curse instead of a known defensive spell. And even Ginny, when Hermione says, "You can't call that Sectumsempra spell good, Ginny, look where it's landed him!" (she, of course, thinks that the detentions are for using the spell) and mentions that the detentions have ruined Gryffindor's chances for the Quidditch Cup, Ginny just sneers that Hermione should shut up about Quidditch. (As usual, everyone is missing the real point.) To return to self-defense, why doesn't Harry mention it? He has the opportunity with Snape. It's likely that he had a similar opportunity with McGonagall but again chose to say nothing. Maybe it's because he knows that self-defense doesn't justify using that spell ("I'm not defending what I did!"). He knows perfectly well that other spells would have worked as well or better without leaving his opponent in a pool of blood. Maybe he also knows (but won't admit to himself) that he should have suspected that a spell labeled "for enemies" was probably a whole lot Darker than a toenail hex. As far as the teachers are concerned, I think that both Snape and McGonagall prefer to give Harry a series of detentions rather than have the incident investigated--as they would have to have done if Snape hadn't saved Draco's life. And I think, too, though I can't see into their minds, that the entire staff of Hogwarts operates on the principle that it doesn't matter who started it; both students are at fault if they get involved in a fight. McGonagall, after all, gave Neville detention along with the HRH and Draco simply for being out of bed after hours. Rules are rules and (unless her Quidditch team needs a Seeker) there are no exceptions. Mike: > But Snape has no proof that Harry was lying, and all he would be lying about is his ownership of a book. Carol: He has proof that Harry is lying about finding the spell in a library book. He knows full well, having seen the image of his own Potions book floating to the forefront of Harry's mind, that he got the spell from that book. And Harry lies again, presenting "Roonil Wazlib's" Potions book as his own and saying that Roonil Wazlib is his nickname. That may not be proof Snape can share with McGonagall, but it's certainly all the proof that Snape himself needs. And yet Snape doesn't tell Slughorn that Harry has been cheating in his class. Why not? Maybe that's not the issue. Harry has shown himself to be untrustworthy, and from Snape's perspective, that's a very bad sign. Carol, who understands that you're worried about the self-defense angle not being investigated and has wondered about it herself but is more concerned about Harry not retaining his sense of horror at what he's done, as he'll need to do to avoid Dark magic in future and defeat Voldemort through Love From bartl at sprynet.com Sun Feb 18 23:43:24 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:43:24 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Deconstructing the Potterverse In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45D8E49C.6030607@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165154 kat7555 wrote: >>It has been done; the novel and Broadway show, "Wicked", >>deconstructing the Wizard of Oz (although mostly the movie, as the >>novel was an allegory of the Heroic Journey necessary for the >>protagonists to see that what they were seeking was within >>themselves, not to mention containing strong esoteric symbology of >>good and evil which "Wicked" throws away because it would keep the >>story from working) comes to mind immediately. > > I loved Wicked it is one of my favorite books ever. I gained an > appreciation for Elphaba that you couldn't get from the movie. I > don't think you could use the same technique for the Harry Potter > books since Voldemort is so evil. I'd love to read POA from Lupin's > point of view or Order of the Phoenix from Sirius' point of view. I > feel they are the most important characters in those books along > with Harry. I'd also love to read a Harry Potter prequel which would > describe events leading up to Harry being left with the Dursleys. It may be that I am quite familiar with the history of Frank Baum, come from the same religious and philosophical tradition, and am well aware what he was trying to do in the book, THE WIZARD OF OZ, but WICKED is a sick travesty, much as rewriting the Harry Potter series with Voldemort as the hero and Dumbledore and Potter as the villains would be. Bart From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 00:59:17 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 00:59:17 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165155 > >>Carol: > > To return to self-defense, why doesn't Harry mention it? > > Maybe he also knows (but won't admit to himself) that he should > have suspected that a spell labeled "for enemies" was probably a > whole lot Darker than a toenail hex. > Betsy Hp: I think part of it is that Harry wasn't just thinking "self-defense" himself. At least, I think a part of him was wanting to hurt Draco rather than just stop him. Having reread the scene (thank you Alla for typing it out, and gosh, isn't Draco a talented young wizard, blocking an unspoken and unfamiliar jinx with an unspoken block of his own ) it looks like Harry and Draco fighting: situation fairly normal. Yes, Draco starts the fight, but Harry engages. He's standing in a doorway; he could have easily exited back through it. But his instinct is to stand and fight. And I think that when Draco starts to throw the Crucio, Harry is at a point where he wants Draco to hurt just as Draco is wanting to hurt Harry. And so Harry "bellows" that curse he knows is for enemies. Of course Harry doesn't mean for Draco to get ripped open. But I do think he meant for Draco to experience some sort of pain. Which is part of the reason for his horror, I think, and his guilt. And it's probably part of the reason Harry completely blocks Draco's existence until the Tower scene. > >>Carol: > And I think, too, though I can't see into their minds, that the > entire staff of Hogwarts operates on the principle that it doesn't > matter who started it; both students are at fault if they get > involved in a fight. McGonagall, after all, gave Neville detention > along with the HRH and Draco simply for being out of bed after > hours. Rules are rules and (unless her Quidditch team needs a > Seeker) there are no exceptions. Betsy Hp: I agree. I think another part of it is that Draco and Harry have a history. While one or the other boy may be more "at fault" from one incident to the next, the teachers are probably fairly safe in thinking that the "victim" joined the fray with full enthusiasm. Figuring out who "started it" is just not something the teachers are going to be interested in. Why bother? Why did these two become such rivals in the first place? It's a mystery. In a situation like this I'd imagine both boys would be punished. And they are. Draco is seriously injured (and who knows what else Snape does) and Harry has detention. And it works. Neither boy confronts the other after this. Betsy Hp From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 01:12:25 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 01:12:25 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165156 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol: > No, no, no! Of course I'm not saying that Snape and/or McGonnagall > thought Harry deserved to be expelled for lying to a teacher. I'm > saying that he could have been expelled for using a curse that > nearly killed another student, but Snape apparently didn't even > raise the possibility, at least not to Harry. He punished Harry for > lying to him, not for defending himself or even for thoughtlessly > using a curse he didn't know would nearly kill the other student. > McGonagall says that Harry could have been expelled and that she > approves of the detentions. She doesn't say why. Mike: I guess we're at another one of those agree to disagree times. I think McGonnagall as much as confirms Harry is being punished for the Sectumsempra when she tells Harry "he was lucky not have been expelled" (p. 529). Because I don't think McG thought Harry was lucky to not have been expelled for lying to Snape and the context of this narrative passage is Harry's punishment from Snape that McG "wholeheartedly" supports. > Carol: > There's no question that Harry was punished for being "a liar and a > cheat," primarily for not telling Snape where he found the curse, > which Snape knows perfectly well was in his own Potions book labeled > "for enemies." Mike: Sorry, I'm not trying to be ornery, but I don't agree with this analysis. As I said in the titled post, I think the "liar and a cheat" comment was a gratuitous dig against Harry when he couldn't get Harry to produce the book. Also, I don't think Snapes Legilimencing of Harry qualifies as evidence for the rest of the staff, however much both Snape and Harry know the true story. But utmost in my opinion is the obvious; Harry is being punished for slicing Draco open, not for lying about where he learned a spell. > Carol: > I personally believe that he's protecting both Harry and Draco. > He doesn't want either of them expelled because they'd both be > in terrible danger from the Dark Lord. But I could be wrong. Mike: I don't think you're wrong. I agree with your interpretation here. > > Carol, who understands that you're worried about the self-defense > angle not being investigated and has wondered about it herself but > is more concerned about Harry not retaining his sense of horror at > what he's done, as he'll need to do to avoid Dark magic in future > and defeat Voldemort through Love Mike: Once again, poignant remarks in your sign-off. Part of my concern was the lack of follow through from the staff, that is true. But I also positioned myself on the side of 'Harry showed the proper remorse for using the spell and shouldn't dwell on it any more'. Avoiding Dark Magic, yes, it won't work for Harry in the long run. But if Harry is going to be effective in the coming battles, he best not be caught dwelling on the past. Learning from it, yes, dwelling on it, no. BTW, I read your remarks on counter-curse canon and you were right. Even if it is coming from the unreliable narrator, it's still canon and I bow to your expertise. Mike From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 01:16:03 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 01:16:03 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165157 > Betsy Hp: > I think part of it is that Harry wasn't just thinking "self- defense" > himself. At least, I think a part of him was wanting to hurt Draco > rather than just stop him. Alla: Yeah, and I keep asking for some support of Harry wanting to hurt Draco rather than to stop him :) Betsy: > Having reread the scene (thank you Alla for typing it out, and gosh, > isn't Draco a talented young wizard, blocking an unspoken and > unfamiliar jinx with an unspoken block of his own ) it looks like > Harry and Draco fighting: situation fairly normal. Yes, Draco starts > the fight, but Harry engages. He's standing in a doorway; he could > have easily exited back through it. But his instinct is to stand and > fight. Alla: He could leave? When? In a second when the lamp was exploding behind him? "Malfoy wheeled around, drawing his wand. Instinctively, Harry pulled out his own. Malfoy's hex missed Harry by inches, shattering the lamp on the wall beside him; Harry threw himself sideways, thought Levicorpus! and flicked his wand, but Malfoy blocked the jinx and raised his wand for another ?" Sure, he instinctively draws his wand, but I am failing to see where it says that he instinctively ready to do more than to defend himself. Betsy: > And I think that when Draco starts to throw the Crucio, Harry is at a > point where he wants Draco to hurt just as Draco is wanting to hurt > Harry. And so Harry "bellows" that curse he knows is for enemies. Alla: Well, where? Where does it say that Harry wants Draco to hurt just for the sake of hurting him? Why it is not normal to think of person who throws an unforgivable at you as somebody else other than your enemy? Is person who throws Crucio at you your friend? Seriously, the only person who threw Crucio at Harry so far was Voldemort. Betsy: > Of course Harry doesn't mean for Draco to get ripped open. But I do > think he meant for Draco to experience some sort of pain. Which is > part of the reason for his horror, I think, and his guilt. And it's > probably part of the reason Harry completely blocks Draco's existence > until the Tower scene. Alla: I agree. He probably meant for Draco to experience the sort of pain that would stop him from completing that Crucio. I do not see any evidence in that scene that Harry meant for Draco to experience any sort of pain beyond that. JMO, Alla. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Feb 19 01:20:11 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 01:20:11 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165158 > Alla: > > If there was a time interval, a second, a half-second in between > Draco saying it and Harry responding with Sectusemptra, then sure I > can see the argument that it was uncomplete one. > > But Harry shuts Draco up right in the middle of him saying the > curse, so I am disagreeing with **Harry thought it was a true > Crucio**, yes. I am saying that it **was** true Crucio and Harry > did not let him finish. Pippin: But we've been shown that it takes more than pointing your wand and saying the word to make it a true Crucio, so I am not sure how we can do more than speculate about whether the true curse would have been performed if it had been completed. > Mike: > > > Harry's mindset has always been transparent, not just for the > readers but also for the other characters in the story, imo. Pippin: Not always. The reader doesn't know that Ron hasn't really been given Felix potion. But in this case, Harry deeply regrets what he did. He doesn't claim that he's being punished unfairly, only that it's burdensome that he has to miss Quidditch and being with Ginny. He says more than once that if he'd known what the spell did, he wouldn't have used it. He doesn't say, even after Ginny suggests it, that it was the right spell since he was under attack. I think he understands that if Dark Magic is acceptable in self-defense, then the whole concept founders. There are no spells that draw their power from the forces of evil, there are only powerful spells and those too weak to use them. I can understand people not wanting to think that their hero's instincts led him to an evil choice. But the whole thrust of HBP, IMO, is that Harry's instincts aren't enough any more. Harry has to learn to think before he acts, or he'll face disaster. Isn't that the real world lesson of the non-verbal spell? Pippin From juli17 at aol.com Mon Feb 19 01:23:06 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 20:23:06 EST Subject: Bathroom scene- A different outcome Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165159 I'm been thinking, what if Snape HADN'T been lurking nearby when Harry used the Sectumsempra on Draco? What if Draco had bled to death on that bathroom floor before Harry could find help? What would this mean for Harry, and for the story? Draco did use an Unforgivable, and even if Harry's word wouldn't be enough, surely a Pensieve could be used to verify Draco's attack with a Crucio. So I think Harry would be acquitted of any actual crime since he can claim self-defense, even if the spell he used was an offensive one. Though he might still be expelled from Hogwarts, if we go by McGonagall's canon comments. But how would it affect Harry emotionally? Would Harry be able to live with the knowledge that he killed someone? Yes, someone who did attack him first, but who he would know full well he could have stopped with a defensive spell--or even with an offensive spell he knew how to control--rather than by using an untried curse labelled "for enemies." I know police officers who have killed in the line of duty often have a hard time dealing with that fact, no matter how justifiable the act, and even when there was no other option. And Harry had other options. And what of the story? Dumbledore said Harry has the ability to win against Voldemort because he has remained pure at heart. Could a Harry who has killed, if unintentionally and regretfully, still face down Voldemort? Even if he wasn't expelled from Hogwarts, could he remain there as if nothing had changed? (Of course it would also mean Dumbledore would live and Snape would be free of the UV--I think--but I'm focusing on Harry right now.) Draco deserved a painful comeuppance for trying to cast a Crucio (which he did get in canon), but he didn't deserve death. Harry doesn't think so in canon, and that wouldn't change if Draco had died from the Sectumsempra. And no matter how much Harry tried to justify his action in his mind, he'd still know (or believe, if you wish), every hour of every day, that it didn't have to end that way, if only he'd thought before he'd acted. (Again, this is how *Harry* would feel, based on his immediate sense of guilt and regret in canon, even if others would insist that he was fully justified.) Julie, who can't imagine what Harry's future would be like if Draco had died on that floor, and who thinks Snape did Harry his greatest favor yet when he saved Draco's life. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 01:53:35 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 01:53:35 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165160 > >>Alla: > Yeah, and I keep asking for some support of Harry wanting to hurt > Draco rather than to stop him :) Betsy Hp: Support one: Harry *does* hurt Draco, nearly kills him. Support two: Harry *never* uses the "he was going to *Crucio* me!" excuse. So pure self-defense doesn't seem to have been on his mind. In fact, most of what he says (or tries to say) is more along the lines of "I didn't mean to!". So there you are. :) > >>Betsy: > > Yes, Draco starts the fight, but Harry engages. He's > > standing in a doorway; he could have easily exited back through > > it. But his instinct is to stand and fight. > >>Alla: > He could leave? When? In a second when the lamp was exploding > behind him? > "Malfoy wheeled around, drawing his wand. Instinctively, Harry > pulled out his own." Betsy Hp: There is the moment. Draco draws his wand, Harry runs away. That's how Harry could have left. But it's not really in Harry's nature, so he draws his own wand and engages. I'm not, by the way, saying Harry was a horrible person for staying. It would have taken someone of a very different (*much* more practical) nature to have fled the scene. But by staying Harry plays a part. > >>Alla: > Well, where? Where does it say that Harry wants Draco to hurt just > for the sake of hurting him? > Betsy Hp: It doesn't. But it's not like Harry misses an opportunity. Draco and Harry do have a history, one that includes Harry hurting Draco. (Which is why, I'm sure, the staff don't question the whys and wherefores. This is nothing new.) Just as Draco is interested in making Harry suffer, Harry is interested in seeing Draco suffer. They both pull spells for enemies as taught to them by their mentors. > >>Betsy: > > Of course Harry doesn't mean for Draco to get ripped open. But I > > do think he meant for Draco to experience some sort of pain. > > > >>Alla: > I agree. He probably meant for Draco to experience the sort of pain > that would stop him from completing that Crucio. I do not see any > evidence in that scene that Harry meant for Draco to experience any > sort of pain beyond that. Betsy Hp: If Harry *just* wanted to stop Draco, he'd have used a familiar defensive spell. Instead he goes for the "enemies" spell. Part of it was to use as a counter, I agree. But part of him must have wanted Draco to suffer as an enemy should suffer. Otherwise, why the guilt? Why not point out the self-defense reason? Betsy Hp From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Feb 19 01:55:09 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 20:55:09 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective References: Message-ID: <009701c753c9$008dbf90$8166400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165161 Magpie: >> However that is *not* a statement that's supposed to mean that >> Harry's own curse is less appropriate. Harry thought he was having >> one thrown at him, so his reaction counts as a reaction to true >> Crucio regardless. > > Mike: > I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here. Draco didn't get to > complete his curse but that didn't obviate Harry's response? Of > course, Harry's curse was the reason Draco didn't get to complete the > Crucio. Still not sure what your point is?! Magpie: I was trying to avoid somebody taking my side statement about Draco's curse not being completed (so we don't know how it would have gone and he is in no danger of Azkaban) as something Harry should have taken into consideration himself. Like you, I thought it was obvious that the reason Draco never completed his attempt was because Harry zapped him. Mike: > As to the degree of "hard and fast" rule, like I said previously, not > my choice, it's canon. And who was going to turn in Harry on his > Crucio attempts? Bella? Snape, after AKing Dumbledore? Magpie: But Harry hardly thinks about how likely it is he'll get caught when he throws a Crucio. He's gotten in trouble for use of magic without witnesses before. I'm saying that Unforgiveables are presented in canon as bad more than they are a way to get yourself in jail. This is probably another side issue I should never introduced. It's just a random thing I notice a lot, that fandom tends to bring this up more than it is in canon. > Mike: > Sorry, I don't think I was ignoring Harry's state of mind. This part > was on the dynamics of the fight, Harry's split-second choice to fire > off Sectumsempra. But I expected too much, thinking my point was > clear. It was fine in my head. :D > > First off, I agree that Harry was probably not fearing permanent > damage a la the Longbottoms. I think Harry has made it clear that he > didn't fear Draco. > > Secondly, I also think the enmity Harry has for the whole Malfoy > family was abundantly clear. The raw hatred exhibited after the > Quidditch match in OoP spoke volumns to me. The confirmation of > Harry's hatred for the Malfoys in Madam Malkin's shop sealed the deal > for me. I never thought there was any question that Harry would like > nothing more than for the entire Malfoy family to be eradicated. And > he wouldn't mind being the impetus for that eradication if the > circumstances presented. But Harry is not a vigilante with respect to > the Malfoys, he isn't going to be the instigator. So that's the > mindset I see Harry having walking into the loo. > > Once the fight starts, I thought Harry was exhibiting measured > responses, like I said before. He may hate Draco, but he didn't have > any intent to kill or permanently disfigure. And when Draco begins > his Crucio, he has defined himself as an "enemy". As Eggplant pointed > out, Harry calls upon the correct spell for the situation, the one > marked "for enemies". To me his intent was pure and simple; stop > Draco's Crucio. And after rereading his description of the effects of > LV's Crucio in GoF, I can see why he would want to avoid that > experience at all costs. > > Harry's mindset has always been transparent, not just for the readers > but also for the other characters in the story, imo. It never > occurred to me that anyone would have to question where Harry stood. > What seemed to be in question in this thread was whether Harry was > justified in using Sectumsempra. And I titled it "A Different > Perspective". > And quite frankly, I resent being referred to as the "Blame Police". > I don't think my post, nor anyone elses, is stopping you from framing > your discussion in any way that you choose. Nor are you required to > join every thread or counter every argument. And if you don't like my > conclusions/analysis you are free to respond as you wish, or not > respond if you so wish. My choice to focus on different aspects of > the discussion does not preclude you from focusing on other aspects. Magpie: I'm sorry for the snippy name-calling. That was an unfair way to talk about my frustration with myself. It's just, I feel like I agree with people, and say so, and somehow am not taken at my word, as if I can't agree with them and also have these other concerns. It's not that I'm being kept from saying what or having the conversation that I want, it's more that I feel like I've said this stuff over and over and it's not believed or something. I really have no problems with Harry's state of mind as you've described it here . So what am I doing wrong? Not for you personally--I'm talking about the thread in general, since you were reading it.Why is it that when you describe Harry's pov this way you get "I agree completely" where I get "But Harry was acting in self-defense and wanted to hurt Malfoy to stop him." The only difference I can really see is where we think Harry is and should be feeling about the incident now. Which is fine--except that it seems like that difference of opinion seems to keep getting translated into "I think it's Harry's fault" as if making me see it was self-defense will take care of my feelings about Harry's state of mind after the incident and I don't know how more clearly I can say that it won't, because I already see that. Harry *isn't* angry at Malfoy in this scene the way he is on, say, the Quidditch Pitch. If we talked about *that* disagreement instead we still might reach an agree to disagree conclusion, but at least we'd both be heard. My disagreement on the second thing wouldn't be assumed to be disagreement on the first thing. >> Magpie: >> Hey, I'm "okay with it" too. I'm not horrified by Harry in the >> scene. I liked Draco being sliced up (we Draco fans often love our >> hurt/comfort). > > Mike: LOL, can I get you a razor blade? :D Magpie: I like it best when Harry does it.:-D > >> Magpie: >> But I still think there's more to this for Harry's character than >> that he was justified. In fact, I think the justification he felt >> and still feels is partly what makes the result of the spell so >> icky for him. If it was all he needed to feel was justified, Harry >> would be a lot more like Tom Riddle. Maybe I want to analyze that a >> bit beyond "Harry's a great kid so of course he feels badly at >> hurting someone...even if he was totally justified and it was all >> Malfoy's fault and the detentions are totally unfair!" > > Mike: > I thought you were against setting up Straw Men? Your perspective and > mine do not coincide. Your choice for in-depth discussion and mine do > not coincide. I find Harry's intent and the after-effects on him to > be transparent and rather simple, so I choose not to go there. If you > think there is more to the story, if you detect some deep > undercurrent of emotion not revealed, go ahead, speak your mind. I > don't see it, so I'm not going to. I'm sorry if you feel I'm stifling > your discussion. Magpie: I don't think it's an undercurrent of emotion. I think the emotion you have described here is enough for what Harry is feeling--which, after all, is not a nervous breakdown. It's just a feeling like his conscience isn't completely at rest about the matter. I don't think it's stifling my discussion--if nobody wants to discuss an issue that's not their fault. Nobody has to be interested in something just because I am. What frustrates me isn't the stifling of discussion--and maybe I'm just unfair to think it's got to do with anyone else at all. What's really frustrating me is my apparent inability to put my point across in any way--not only am I not able to make what I'm *trying* to say plain, but even the parts where I agree seem to be taken as something else. >> Magpie: >> Okay, I'm sorry that JKR did not write the book with the aftermath >> to Sectumsempra being about Harry's being vindicated and apologized >> to for having to miss a Quidditch game because he was in detention >> for almost killing that guy when that guy started it and was going >> to throw a Crucio. And that the response to the scene from the >> teachers (since the "justice system" never gets involved) is not to >> launch an investigation into why he did it. > > Mike: > Wow, two Straw Men in one response. Launch an investigation? How > about "Why did you do it?" Did you get the impression that > McGonnagall even asked for Harry's side? I didn't get that. And I > know Snape didn't bother with Harry's story. BTW, "justice system" is > not confined to the "court system". There is such a thing as an > informal justice system and I believe the detention system at > Hogwarts qualifies. Magpie: Yes, I do get the impression that Harry's side is known, actually, but I could be wrong. More importantly, I definitely got the impression that the issue of Harry's side not being known was not an issue at all in the story, as it often is. So it seems like this particular oversight, as Carol said, is an issue with where JKR went rather than something that's illustrating an unfairness in the teachers to Harry (except Snape, whose unfairness is unique and consistent). So if this is one of those places where again we're just talking about different things and not interested much in participating in the other's discussion that's fine--but it's not really a disagreement. >> Magpie: >> That could be why for me, the bathroom scene does not automatically >> lead to the injustice of Harry having to miss a Quidditch game for >> slicing Draco up. And perhaps also because from what I've read of >> McGonagall I think she could very well know that Harry thought he >> was going to be Crucio'd and still feel she ought to back up >> Saturday detentions just to make it clear exsanguinations are not >> approved of by the faculty. > > Mike: > This is what I would have expected from McGonnagall's character, but > I didn't see it. JKR could have added the lines "Harry tried to tell > McGonnagall about Draco trying to use Crucio, but she stopped him. > She told him that she knew what Malfoy tried and it doesn't matter." > But she didn't. So what makes you think that McGonnagall made any > inquiries? Where in canon do you get the impression that anybody > asked Harry for his side, other than Ron, Hermione, and Ginny? As you > said above, that's not the story that JKR wrote. Magpie: >From other people knowing the story from Myrtle, I suppose. But I'm not claiming to have proof that this is what happened--I'd have no problem with lines like you described. I think that also would have changed Harry's reaction to the incident, though, and so JKR didn't put it in for a reason. But as I said, it's not for me about knowing for sure that McGonagall knows all this. It just wasn't something that was brought up, so it didn't feel like something that needed to be addressed. > Mike: > McG made a point of telling Harry he was "lucky not to have been > expelled". And I'm sure she is aware of the state of the Potter- > Malfoy relationship. But, both the self-defense angle and that there > is some "official" rule are conjecture not evident in canon. I > propose that canon suggests no chance for Harry to plead self- > defense. Magpie: It's possible. Perhaps Harry's using and having a Dark Curse like that trumps anything and there was no room for him to point the finger at Malfoy for his Crucio as well, at least to McGonagall. Mike: > Might Harry had to serve detention anyway? Not the point. The point > was that the staff, and specifically McG, don't give Harry the chance > to explain himself. The greater point is that the entire WW does not > seem to think the accused has the right to present a defense, > regardless of whether that defense would exonerate themselves. Think > about Harry's trial at the Wizengamut. What chance would a fifteen > year old Harry have had if Dumbledore had not been there and arranged > for Figgy to present evidence? Magpie: No, they don't. I agree. They only want to hear what a defendent has to say when they want to get him off themselves. Alla: What is **wrong** with saying that Harry thought it was true Crucio? Um, nothing, but by the same token there is nothing wrong with challenging that. To me it looks as true Crucio, pure and simple and I see no signs that Draco would have not be able to complete it. Magpie: Yes, it looks like a true Crucio--so did Harry's in OotP. But since it's not completed and we've never seen Draco cast one, Harry can't know for sure. It just doesn't matter from his pov. It's like if somebody threatens you with an unloaded gun. Maybe it was unloaded, but you would have no way of knowing it and would react to it as a loaded gun. Alla: But Harry shuts Draco up right in the middle of him saying the curse, so I am disagreeing with **Harry thought it was a true Crucio**, yes. I am saying that it **was** true Crucio and Harry did not let him finish. Magpie: You seem to be thinking when I say it might not have been a "true Crucio" that I mean maybe Draco was really going to say something else. I'm not. I assume Draco was going to bellow "Crucio!" Then we'd see if he had similar problems to Harry in the MoM who also bellowed "Crucio!" in a similar situation. That difference makes no difference to Harry on the floor reacting with Sectumsempra, obviously. Unloaded gun vs. loaded gun again. You can't say it was a true Crucio in that sense. You can only tell that by seeing the effects. > Magpie: >> What's the matter with saying Harry thought he had one being thrown > at him? I said, quite reasonably imo, that we have seen a teenaged > boy try to throw Crucio and apparently not really "mean it" in the > correct way to throw one for real. > > Ceridwen: > *ducking and donning MOPP suit* I tend to look at the difference > between effective and ineffective Cruciatus curses a little > differently than I've read elsewhere. To me, when Harry attempts his > two Crucios, and when Draco attempts it in the bathroom (why, oh why, > couldn't he have chosen the Quidditch pitch???), their tempers are > Hot: Quick flare-ups, quick cool-downs. When Bellatrix and other > seasoned Cruciatus throwers do them, their tempers are Cold. They > mean to inflict pain, so they don't need the heat of anger to do > them, they just need the cool of deliberate malice. Draco was > already heating up - crying, upset, afraid for himself and his > family, and discovered crying by a fellow student. He was too Hot to > be cool enough to cast an effective Crucio, in my opinion. Just as > Harry was upset and grieving and angry when he attempted to give > Bellatrix the same pain he was feeling for Sirius. Magpie: That's the distinction I make as well. I don't think Harry understands what a Crucio truly is, because the only time he wants to cause pain is when he's feeling angry or in pain himself and wants to throw it at someone else. That's why a kid who's killed a cat is one people would worry about in a different way than they'd worry about a kid who punched another kid out when he made him angry. If you're angry at someone you might get to the point where you want to hit them--and that's still something to control--but that's different from being a sadist who coolly inflicts pain for pleasure. Both Harry and Draco have shown the ability to take pleasure in someone else's suffering when it satisfies them (I think most characters have--it's a fairly common human feeling), but neither of them is about pure sadism--even Draco, who can be rather squeamish, it seems to me. Ceridwen: And, I don't think it could have lasted nearly long enough, even if Draco had been able to cast a successful Cruciatus (which I doubt, see above), because Moaning Myrtle would have had her ten-conniption fit then, too. Even without Myrtle, Harry's own screams would have brought Snape, who seemed to be nearby, running. And even if you think Snape is the king of ESE, he would have to have stopped the casting of an Unforgivable in that setting, or Moaning Myrtle would have broadcast *that* all over the school. Magpie: Yes, this kind of Crucio seems like it requires not only a mastery and pleasure of torture on level with Bellatrix and Barty, it also requires time and privacy Draco doesn't have. He's throwing it the same way Harry does at the MoM. More importantly is what Harry would think in the scene, and I just think to him Crucio means what it's always meant to him: what he felt when Voldemort did it to him, what he thinks when he wants to do it to Snape. I don't even think insanity was his fear when Umbridge was going to do it to him--and the Umbridge situation actually *was* one that had something in common with the Longbottoms. Umbridge was in a cool state of mind and was planning to torture Harry in order to get him to talk--like the Longbottoms Julie: Draco did use an Unforgivable, and even if Harry's word wouldn't be enough, surely a Pensieve could be used to verify Draco's attack with a Crucio. So I think Harry would be acquitted of any actual crime since he can claim self-defense, even if the spell he used was an offensive one. Though he might still be expelled from Hogwarts, if we go by McGonagall's canon comments. Magpie: As Mike said, the Wizarding Justice system tends to be amazingly uninterested in the truth. Not sure if self-defense from Crucio (a non-killing curse) is considered something that justifies killing, though Harry would have to explain that he didn't know he was using anything that would kill. Frankly, he might not have had to. Harry's popular with the Ministry at the moment, he's the Chosen One. Draco's father is in Azkaban and connected with Voldemort. I think Harry might have had one of his "better" experiences with the law on this one. -m From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 02:35:08 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 02:35:08 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165162 > > Carol said: > > No, no, no! Of course I'm not saying that Snape and/or McGonnagall > > thought Harry deserved to be expelled for lying to a teacher. I'm > > saying that he could have been expelled for using a curse that > > nearly killed another student, but Snape apparently didn't even > > raise the possibility, at least not to Harry. He punished Harry for > > lying to him, > Mike responded: > I guess we're at another one of those agree to disagree times. I > think McGonnagall as much as confirms Harry is being punished for the > Sectumsempra when she tells Harry "he was lucky not have been > expelled" (p. 529). Because I don't think McG thought Harry was lucky > to not have been expelled for lying to Snape and the context of this > narrative passage is Harry's punishment from Snape that > McG "wholeheartedly" supports. zgirnius chimes is: It seems to me that you are both right. Who is punishing Harry? It appears to be Snape. He's the authority figure on the scene. He tells Harry why he deserves to be punished (as the book says, because Harry is a liar and a cheat). He decides what the punishment will be. And, in fact, everything happens just as Snape says (though, based on CoS, it would seem McG needed to approve his decision, since Harry is in her House). On the other hand, I don't think Snape ever told McG about Harry's use of Snape's Potions text and the assorted additions in it all year. He did, naturally, tell everyone what happened in the bathroom, including the fact that Harry nearly killed Draco with a Dark spell. So McGonagall, based on what she was told, confirmed Snape's decision. However, Snape might have have dealt with Harry differently, had Harry levelled with him about the book. In particular, he might have left the matter in McG's hands, made a different recommendation to her, or presented the case to her in a different way, which might reasonably be expected to have resulted in a different outcome for Harry. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 02:58:00 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 02:58:00 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene /Free passes to characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165163 > > >>Alla: > > Yeah, and I keep asking for some support of Harry wanting to hurt > > Draco rather than to stop him :) > > Betsy Hp: > Support one: Harry *does* hurt Draco, nearly kills him. Alla: In response to Draco trying to Crucio him, sure. Just as one can hurt an attacker to defend himself, even kill that attacker. Betsy Hp: Support two: > Harry *never* uses the "he was going to *Crucio* me!" excuse. So > pure self-defense doesn't seem to have been on his mind. In fact, > most of what he says (or tries to say) is more along the lines of "I > didn't mean to!". So there you are. :) Alla: Sure, Harry feels guilty, yes, but does he feel guilty for using the weapon he did not know what would happen or for having those thoughts of hurting Draco beyond self-defense. See, just as Mike does I am **very** glad that Harry feels guilty, I am just not sure how that translates the scene in something else. Thanks anyways :) > > >>Alla: > > Well, where? Where does it say that Harry wants Draco to hurt just > > for the sake of hurting him? > > > > Betsy Hp: > It doesn't. But it's not like Harry misses an opportunity. Draco > and Harry do have a history, one that includes Harry hurting Draco. > (Which is why, I'm sure, the staff don't question the whys and > wherefores. This is nothing new.) Just as Draco is interested in > making Harry suffer, Harry is interested in seeing Draco suffer. > They both pull spells for enemies as taught to them by their mentors. Alla: Misses what opportunity? He is wet and on the floor, and IMO loses the fight at this moment completely but for Sectumseptra. > Betsy Hp: > If Harry *just* wanted to stop Draco, he'd have used a familiar > defensive spell. Instead he goes for the "enemies" spell. Part of > it was to use as a counter, I agree. But part of him must have > wanted Draco to suffer as an enemy should suffer. Otherwise, why the > guilt? Why not point out the self-defense reason? Alla: Maybe because self-defense or not he is horrified that Draco is almost bled to death? And what Mike said too > > Mike: > > McG made a point of telling Harry he was "lucky not to have been > > expelled". And I'm sure she is aware of the state of the Potter- > > Malfoy relationship. But, both the self-defense angle and that there > > is some "official" rule are conjecture not evident in canon. I > > propose that canon suggests no chance for Harry to plead self- > > defense. > Alla: But Harry shuts Draco up right in the middle of him saying the curse, so I am disagreeing with **Harry thought it was a true Crucio**, yes. I am saying that it **was** true Crucio and Harry did not let him finish. Magpie: You seem to be thinking when I say it might not have been a "true Crucio" that I mean maybe Draco was really going to say something else. I'm not. I assume Draco was going to bellow "Crucio!" Then we'd see if he had similar problems to Harry in the MoM who also bellowed "Crucio!" in a similar situation. That difference makes no difference to Harry on the floor reacting with Sectumsempra, obviously. Unloaded gun vs. loaded gun again. You can't say it was a true Crucio in that sense. You can only tell that by seeing the effects. Alla: I thought that you were saying that Draco will not completed the Crucio, no matter what, not that he would have said something else. Sorry if I misunderstood. But yes, sure we do not see the effect, I was just disagreeing that Crucio would not have been completed. Juli17 at ... wrote: > > I'm been thinking, what if Snape HADN'T been lurking nearby when > Harry used the Sectumsempra on Draco? What if Draco had bled > to death on that bathroom floor before Harry could find help? > What would this mean for Harry, and for the story? > > And what of the story? Dumbledore said Harry has the ability to > win against Voldemort because he has remained pure at heart. > Could a Harry who has killed, if unintentionally and regretfully, still > face down Voldemort? Even if he wasn't expelled from Hogwarts, > could he remain there as if nothing had changed? (Of course it > would also mean Dumbledore would live and Snape would be free > of the UV--I think--but I'm focusing on Harry right now.) > >> Julie, who can't imagine what Harry's future would be like if Draco > had died on that floor, and who thinks Snape did Harry his greatest > favor yet when he saved Draco's life. Alla: Oh, with this I agree completely, well maybe not completely but a lot. Yes, sure there is a reason why JKR did not let Draco die on the bathroom floor. I do agree that she does not want Harry to kill anybody, etc. I agree that she wants Harry to remain horrifying even if he hurt somebody in self-defense. Of course I do think that Snape's favor was rather unintentional and done because Snape was concerned for himself and Draco, not Harry :) But sure it is much better for Harry to not have Draco's death on his conscience. But you know, I still think that even though it is my hunch that Harry would get rid of Voldemort by some other means than direct killing, JKR may go for self-defense at the end and not make Harry feel to guilty for the long time. > Julie: > I also agree the amount of scrutiny the good guys get over their actions > is much higher than the amount of scrutiny the bad (or "grey") guys get > over the same or even worse actions. And there is a reason for that. > The good guys are the better people, hence their assignation as "good." > At least they're supposed to be better. Which is why I hold them to a > HIGHER standard. > >> So, with Harry and Snape, it doesn't really *matter* who is more at > fault. It doesn't matter if Snape is twenty, thirty or fifty times more > at fault. What matters is who has the integrity, the maturity, and the > strength of character to halt the hostilities. Maybe in the end Snape > will recognize his own mistakes and misjudgements, or maybe he > won't. But Harry *must* recognize his. Because that's what makes > him the Hero. > > Julie, who hopes she explained her position coherently. Alla: Oh, that I can understand sort of, but only sort of. Because if you are saying that you hold the good guys to higher standards because they should be better people, become better people, and you care about that more than you care about bad guys' mistakes, that you just do not care to discuss them, I guess I understand that POV. But that still means to me ( if that is my correct understanding of your POV) that you would call bad guys misgivings as such, you just do not want to talk about them. Like Snape/Harry, you seem to be saying that you care more for Harry recognising his own mistakes and changing than for Snape doing so, yes? Because this is Harry story, etc. I get it. But I would call your analysis incomplete and disagree with it, if that really means that Snape does not make mistakes, you know? I mean, you may want to wish fiercely that Harry should change more than Snape, but that does not mean that Snape's mistakes are more horrifying, etc, whether one wishes to talk to them or not. Because eleven year old Harry would have **never** developed hatred of his thirty five year old teacher, if that teacher did not attack him, no? Along the road, sure Harry blames Snape where blame is completely due and not due, but for Snape that would have never started, so as long as we acknowledge it, I understand your POV. I mean, you do say that it matters to you who has maturity, etc, so I think that teacher should have more of such maturity, but I understand from that angle if you want to give Harry higher scrutinity. From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Mon Feb 19 04:23:40 2007 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 04:23:40 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165164 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy Hp: > It doesn't. But it's not like Harry misses an opportunity. Draco > and Harry do have a history, one that includes Harry hurting Draco. > (Which is why, I'm sure, the staff don't question the whys and > wherefores. This is nothing new.) Just as Draco is interested in > making Harry suffer, Harry is interested in seeing Draco suffer. > They both pull spells for enemies as taught to them by their mentors. Quick_Silver: But on one level that isn't true...at least not from my reading of HBP. The rest of the staff have no idea that Snape and Dumbledore are allowing Draco to stay in the school despite knowing that he's behind the attacks on Dumbledore. When Harry walks in on Draco, Draco isn't simply crying he's discussing Voldemort threatening his family...information that most of the staff are not privy to. Even the nature of the crime scene is different then the typical Harry vs. Draco method of operation...Draco and Harry usually fight in public with their friends providing support/cannon fodder. So in my mind the history of Harry vs. Draco is more of a distraction to the staff judging the event. > Betsy Hp: > If Harry *just* wanted to stop Draco, he'd have used a familiar > defensive spell. Instead he goes for the "enemies" spell. Part of > it was to use as a counter, I agree. But part of him must have > wanted Draco to suffer as an enemy should suffer. Otherwise, why the > guilt? Why not point out the self-defense reason? Quick_Silver: I actually agree with what you're saying here (about Harry wanting to hurt Draco) but I think that even if Harry had been totally in the right feeling guilt is a good thing. IMO if Harry were able to shut down his feeling of the guilt of messy handling of Draco then his world would still be very black and white. Quick_Silver From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Mon Feb 19 14:20:19 2007 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:20:19 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165165 > > Betsy Hp: > > They (Harry and Draco) both pull spells for enemies as taught to > them by their mentors. > > Quick_Silver: > ...Draco and Harry usually fight in public > with their friends providing support/cannon fodder. > > > Betsy Hp: > > If Harry *just* wanted to stop Draco, he'd have used a familiar > > defensive spell. Instead he goes for the "enemies" spell. > > ... But part of him must have wanted Draco to suffer > > as an enemy should suffer. > > Quick_Silver: > I actually agree with what you're saying here (about Harry wanting > to hurt Draco) aussie: Wasn't Harry going to try that curse out on Ron in the Dormitory as a joke? Harry didn't know what it would do. Harry's definition of an "enemy" was very different to the HBP's understanding. Harry was shell shocked when he saw what it did. He began to better understand how dark the HBP was. Draco, on the other hand, had a very good understanding of what Crucio was capable of. "Sempre Sectum" looks like the amended curse Snape used against James in the Pensieve. That curse only cut once, not multiple times ... but most curses don't draw blood. Was Snape thinking of James when he wrote "for enemies"? -aussie- From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 15:52:08 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:52:08 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene /Free passes to characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165166 Alla wrote: > > Misses what opportunity? He is wet and on the floor, and IMO loses > the fight at this moment completely but for Sectumseptra. Carol responds: I'm confused here. If he could cast Sectumsempra, an unfamiliar four-syllable spell, complete with wild wand movements, why would he be unable to cast the more familiar and slightly shorter "Stupefy!"? (For that matter, he could have cast Expelliarmus the moment Draco pulled his wand and prevented the whole bloody mess.) I keep stating that Harry does not claim to have used the spell in self-defense. His only attempt at self-justification is to say (truthfully) that he didn't know what the spell did, a point that Snape ignores, probably because using a spell you're not familiar with is about as good an excuse as mixing arsenic in somebody's tea and claiming you didn't know what arsenic does, especially when that spell is clearly labeled "for enemies." Harry himself realizes that not knowing what a spell does is not a good excuse. He tells Hermione "I'm not defending what I did!" IOW, Harry understands that what he did was wrong, and self-defense was not a sufficient excuse when he had other known, tried-and-true *defensive* spells. Yes, he regards Draco as hisenemy, but, like Snape with Harry in SS/PS, he hates him but doesn't want to kill him. BTW, there's a reason that Hogwarts teaches DADA, *Defense* against the Dark Arts rather than the Dark Arts per se. The staff and Dumbledore want to train the students to protect themselves, not to become Dark Wizards. An offensive spell is a weapon. A defensive spell is a shield. Alla: > Of course I do think that Snape's favor was rather unintentional and done because Snape was concerned for himself and Draco, not Harry :) Carol: I think that Snape was primarily concerned with Draco, who was lying on the floor bleeding and could have died. The thought of the UV may have been in his mind, but I doubt that it was his chief motivation. If he didn't care about Draco, he'd never have taken the Unbreakable Vow, putting his own life at risk to protect Draco, in the first place. As for Harry, if Snape is DDM, and I know that's a big it for you (but not for me), he cares about Harry, too--not as a person but as the Chosen One. He doesn't want Harry expelled, where he would be vulnerable to Voldemort, or sent to Azkaban, where he'd be ineffectual against him. But whether Snape's favor to Harry was intentional or not, Harry is very lucky he was there, just as he's lucky that Snape taught him about Bezoars in the very first Potions lesson (as he remembers when he reads HBP!Snape's note on Bezoars in his Potions book). (BTW, I snipped your reference to Snape's age, but wasn't he thirty-two, not thirty-five, in SS/PS? I think 35-36 is his age in GoF, and he's the same age as Sirius Black, give or take a few months, and Sirius was twenty-two at the time of Godric's Hollow, which would make him twenty-one years older than Harry.) Carol, wondering why Alla is responding to everyone's points but hers From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 16:17:08 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 16:17:08 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165167 aussie wrote: > Wasn't Harry going to try that curse out on Ron in the Dormitory as a joke? Harry didn't know what it would do. > > Harry's definition of an "enemy" was very different to the HBP's understanding. Harry was shell shocked when he saw what it did. He began to better understand how dark the HBP was. > "Sempre Sectum" looks like the amended curse Snape used against James in the Pensieve. That curse only cut once, not multiple times ... but most curses don't draw blood. Was Snape thinking of James when he wrote "for enemies"? Carol responds: It's Levicorpus, a nonverbal spell not labeled "for enemies," that Harry tried out on Ron. He was thinking of trying out Sectumsempra on *McLaggen* (rather like his father hexing people who annoyed him in the hallways), but fortunately, for both Harry and McLaggen, he didn't do it. Nor did he test it out on some inanimate object or look up the Latin roots. It was just an unknown spell, clearly nastier than Levicorpus or the toenail hex given the label, but Harry was, as you say, "shell shocked" when he discovered what it did. We don't know for sure that Sectumsempra was an advanced variation of the cutting spell that Severus used on James, but I think it was. For one thing, there's no indication that James is bleeding to death, as he would be even without the slashing movement with a spell whose meaning is "cut always," and which requires a complex countercurse, not a simple healing spell like the one DD used on himself in the cave. Also, Sectumsempra appears in Severus's NEWT Potions book and was consequently probably invented during his sixth year, after the so-called Prank, the "enemies" being James Potter, Sirius Black, and possibly Remus Lupin and Peter Pettigrew. The Pensieve memory occurred at the end of his fifth year, before he'd be using that book, so I think that Sectumsempra, as opposed to a simple, easily healed cutting hex (Sectum?) had not yet been invented. Clearly, however, Severus never used the full-fledged Sectumsempra while he was in school or he'd have been expelled. I'm of two minds about the countercurse, which is complex and does not appear to be jotted in the margins of the book like Liberacorpus, the countercurse for Levicorpus. I think it was created or discovered later, when when Snape was a fully-qualified adult wizard who had turned to Dumbledore's side and developed an interest in Healing (which is hinted at by the Bezoars but only fully revealed in HBP), but whether he invented it or found it in a book of ancient magic, I don't know. I'm pretty sure, however, that he's the only person at Hogwarts who knows that countercurse. Carol, who thinks that Sectumsempra, in contrast to the minor hexes, useful charms, and ingenious Potions hints elsewhere in the book, indicates that Sevvie was heading in a new and dangerous directions thanks to the desire for revenge From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Feb 19 16:39:33 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 16:39:33 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene- A different outcome In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165168 juli17 at ... wrote: > I'm been thinking, what if Snape HADN'T been lurking nearby when > Harry used the Sectumsempra on Draco? What if Draco had bled > to death on that bathroom floor before Harry could find help? > What would this mean for Harry, and for the story? It would mean Dumbledore would still be alive and the world would be a better place > Though he might still be expelled > from Hogwarts, if we go by McGonagall's canon comments. McGonagall is strict but fair, I just can't imagine she would expel a student for defending himself against a unforgivable curse. But it wouldn't be McGonagall's call to make, it would be Dumbledore's. But it's all irrelevant, Harry isn't going back to Hogwarts. > But how would it affect Harry emotionally? > Would Harry be able to live with the > knowledge that he killed someone? In a time of war millions of people have done just that, people who were once little boys just as nice as Harry. And remember, Harry is no longer a little boy. > I know police officers who have killed > in the line of duty often have a hard > time dealing with that fact I like to think Harry is tougher than that. If Achilles had wept EVERY time he killed someone in battle who was trying to kill him we wouldn't be remembering the Iliad 2500 years later. I certainly hope Harry kills someone before the series is over. Besides, Draco is a slime ball, in war good people often kill people much better than Draco. Eggplant From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Feb 19 17:23:13 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 17:23:13 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165169 "justcarol67" wrote: > And Eggplant, a "he", I believe I really should clear that up, my first name is Pat. > is wrong in saying that Harry was punished for using > Sectumsempra. He was punished for lying to Snape, I believe you deserve total credit for that theory, not JKR. Snape suspected Harry had his old potions book but he had no proof. > when Snape first returned from escorting Draco to the hospital wing. > Instead of saying, "But Professor! It was self-defense! Malfoy tried > to Crucio me!" Harry says, "I didn't mean it to happen. I didn't > know what that spell did!" All that proves is that Harry wouldn't make a good lawyer. I don't deny that Harry felt guilty for injuring Draco, but I think his guilt was totally misplaced! > Snape knows he's been cheating in Potions all year I don't recall Harry doing any cheating in Potions, he just researched some things that weren't in the standard textbook; something that was not only allowed in every science or engineering course I've ever tacken but actively ENCOURAGED. > I think Harry knew Draco's intent was to > temporarily hurt him,not to drive him > insane or kill him. I have no idea how Harry is supposed to know that, but after 6 years experience he does know the sort of person Draco is, and I do not believe that would give Harry encouragement. Eggplant From va32h at comcast.net Mon Feb 19 17:49:13 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 17:49:13 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene- A different outcome In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165170 Eggplant wrote: > I like to think Harry is tougher than that. If Achilles had wept EVERY > time he killed someone in battle who was trying to kill him we > wouldn't be remembering the Iliad 2500 years later. I certainly hope > Harry kills someone before the series is over. Besides, Draco is a > slime ball, in war good people often kill people much better than Draco. va32h has to respond: I'm sorry, but I passionately disagree. I am speaking as the wife of a man who *has* killed in war, and let me assure you, feeling remorse for your actions has NOTHING to do with not being tough enough. My husband is preparing for his third deployment since 9/11. He has gone on repeated recovery missions, narrowly avoided car bombs, dodged improvised explosive devices, and spent two weeks living in a garbage dumpster fending off enemy fire, and he is plenty tough enough. But he is not proud and thrilled to have killed people. He is filled with guilt and remorse that will probably haunt him for the rest of his life. If you spent a few hours at the VA with the thousands of soldiers that are experiencing PTSD - I would hope you would not be so cavalier about what it means to take another's life. Killing goes against our every human instinct. Even if you are killing in self defense, it is a devastating and shocking experience that no one should wish on anyone else. va32h, who has seen too much of the after affects of killing to wish it on even a fictional character. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 18:19:34 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 18:19:34 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165171 Carol earlier: > > > And Eggplant, a "he", I believe > Eggplant: > I really should clear that up, my first name is Pat. Carol: As in Patrick, right, not Patricia? > Carol earlier: > > is wrong in saying that Harry was punished for using Sectumsempra. He was punished for lying to Snape, > Eggplant: > I believe you deserve total credit for that theory, not JKR. Snape > suspected Harry had his old potions book but he had no proof. Carol: Here's the canon: "One by one, Snape extracted Harry's books and examined them. Finally, the only book left was the Potions book, which he looked at very carefully before speaking. "'This is your copy of *Advanced Potion Making*, is it, Potter?' "'Yes,' said Harry, still breathing hard. "'You're quite sure of that, are you, Potter?' "'Yes,' said Harry, with a touch more defiance. "'This is the copy of "Advanced Potion Making* that you purchased from Flourish and Blotts?' "'Yes,' said Harry firmly. "'Then why,' asked Snape, 'does it have the name "Roonil Wazlib" written inside the front cover?' "Harry's heart missed a beat. "'That's my nickname,' he said. "'Your nickname,' repeated Snape. "Yeah . . . that's what my friends call me.' "'I understand what a nickname is,' said Snape. The cold, black eyes were boring once more into Harry's; he tried not to look into them. *Close your mind . . . . Close your mind . . . * but he had never learned how to do it properly. . . . "'Do you know what I think, Potter?' said Snape very quietly. 'I think you are a liar and a cheat and that you deserve detention with me until the end of term. What do you think, Potter?' "'I--I don't agree, sir," said Harry, still refusing to look into Snape's eyes. "'Well, we shall see how you feel after your detentions,' said Snape. 'Ten o'clock Saturday morning, Potter. My office'" (HBP Am. ed. 528). Carol again: I don't know, but somehow it seems pretty clear to me that the detentions are for being a liar and a cheat, not for using a Dark spell in self-defense or otherwise. Carol earlier: > > when Snape first returned from escorting Draco to the hospital wing. Instead of saying, "But Professor! It was self-defense! Malfoy tried to Crucio me!" Harry says, "I didn't mean it to happen. I didn't know what that spell did!" > Eggplant: > All that proves is that Harry wouldn't make a good lawyer. I don't deny that Harry felt guilty for injuring Draco, but I think his guilt was totally misplaced! Carol: You're entitled to that view, of course, but it's Harry's feelings that matter for the purposes of this discussion. He feels guilty, he doesn't plead self-defense. If he doesn't, why should we? And, as I keep saying, he didn't have to defend himself using an unknown offensive spell labeled "for enemies." If he's defending himself, shouldn't he use a known *defensive* spell? That's what DADA spells are for, Defense against the Dark Arts--including the Cruciatus Curse. > Carol earlier: > > Snape knows he's been cheating in Potions all year > Eggplant: > I don't recall Harry doing any cheating in Potions, he just researched some things that weren't in the standard textbook; something that was not only allowed in every science or engineering course I've ever tacken but actively ENCOURAGED. Carol: Researched? It was Teen!Snape who did the research. I would hope that your science and engineering teachers didn't encourage students to claim the results of other students' research as their own. As Hermione says, without the HBP, Harry would never have "got a reputation for Potion brilliance [he] didn't deserve" (530). It's the HBP's notes, not Lily's genes, that are responsible for Harry's sudden "brilliance" in Potions, and Harry is afraid that Snape will tell Slughorn exactly that: "And what would happen when Snape saw it {the HBP's Potions book, ironically Snape's own]? Would he tell Slughorn--Harry's stomach churned--how Harry had been achieving such good results in Potions all year? Would he confiscate or destroy the book that had taught Harry so much . . . the book that had become a guide and friend? Harry could not let that happen . . . He could not" (525). So he hides the book and lies to Snape. Harry feels a touch of guilt about the way he's been receiving unearned marks and fear that Snape will tell Slughorn (which he evidently doesn't), but he quickly shifts mental gears to make Snape the culprit. He had to keep the book from being confiscated. And, ironically, the friend and teacher he's protecting from Snape by lying and hiding the book is Snape's own younger self embodied in his notes. Somehow, I don't think Harry is being honest with anyone here--not Slughorn, not Snape, not even himself. > Carol: > > I think Harry knew Draco's intent was to temporarily hurt him, not to drive him insane or kill him. > Eggplant: > I have no idea how Harry is supposed to know that, but after 6 years experience he does know the sort of person Draco is, and I do not believe that would give Harry encouragement. Carol: I don't mean that Harry had any way of knowing whether Draco can successfully cast a Crucio. I think he thought that DE!Draco would and could. (We have no way of knowing whether he was right because the spell was unfinished.) But if Draco could successfully cast the spell, it would be the kind of short-term Crucio that Harry had already experienced at the hands of Voldemort and witnessed Neville suffering at the hands of Bellatrix, not the unique long-term Crucio inflicted by four Death Eaters on the two Longbottoms that drove them to insanity. Harry knows exactly what Crucio is normally about, excruciating pain that ends when the spell is lifted. That's what he's fighting against, using an offensive spell rather than a defensive one. He's fighting torture, not insanity. (See the canon I cited upthread.) Carol, who understands why Harry cast that spell and why he, rightly, IMO, regrets having done so From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 19:04:50 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:04:50 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165172 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Draco and Harry do have a history, one that includes Harry > > hurting Draco. (Which is why, I'm sure, the staff don't question > > the whys and wherefores. This is nothing new.) > > > >>Quick_Silver: > But on one level that isn't true...at least not from my reading of > HBP. > > Even the nature of the crime scene is different then the typical > Harry vs. Draco method of operation...Draco and Harry usually fight > in public with their friends providing support/cannon fodder. So in > my mind the history of Harry vs. Draco is more of a distraction to > the staff judging the event. Betsy Hp: I'm not saying that the staff draw a *correct* conclusion. (Or at least, most of the staff. Snape, I'm sure, knew pretty much exactly what was going on. He probably even knew this was Draco's spot to have a good cry. And McGonagall *might* have had an inkling or two, depending on what sort of hints Dumbledore dropped her. But the rest of the staff would not have made a Voldemort connection, I think.) I'm just saying this is probably why they don't launch an investigation. Draco and Harry have been at each other's throats almost from word go. The year began with Draco giving Harry a bloody nose in a private fight they got into by themselves without attending friends. So as far as the staff can see, this is just more of the same, albeit with more intense consequences. But then again, the consequences have been steadily intensifying, so even that wouldn't stand out as something to look into in a different manner. > >>Quick_Silver: > I actually agree with what you're saying here (about Harry wanting > to hurt Draco) but I think that even if Harry had been totally in > the right feeling guilt is a good thing. IMO if Harry were able to > shut down his feeling of the guilt of messy handling of Draco then > his world would still be very black and white. Betsy Hp: Oh, absolutely. I think both boys learn something pretty big here, which is why it's such a cool scene, IMO. > >>Alla: > > See, just as Mike does I am **very** glad that Harry feels guilty, I > am just not sure how that translates the scene in something else. Betsy Hp: The scene is what it is. The attempt to make it *all* about self- defense is more, IMO, attempting to make the scene be about something else. Yes, Harry is definitely defending himself against Draco's aggression. But Harry is being aggressive himself (not all of the broken fixtures are caused by Draco's wand). And it's Harry's aggressiveness that nearly kills Draco. Harry, at least, recognizes that. Which is why, IMO, you don't hear Harry make the self-defense argument. Betsy Hp From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 19:17:01 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:17:01 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165173 >> > >>Alla: > > > > See, just as Mike does I am **very** glad that Harry feels guilty, I > > am just not sure how that translates the scene in something else. > > Betsy Hp: > The scene is what it is. The attempt to make it *all* about self- > defense is more, IMO, attempting to make the scene be about something > else. Yes, Harry is definitely defending himself against Draco's > aggression. But Harry is being aggressive himself (not all of the > broken fixtures are caused by Draco's wand). And it's Harry's > aggressiveness that nearly kills Draco. Harry, at least, recognizes > that. Which is why, IMO, you don't hear Harry make the self- defense > argument. Alla: Before Harry used Sectusemptra, he used leg locker and levicorpus, I think he could not be any less agressive. IMO of course. But as I had been saying, I do not have a problem with acknowledging that Harry was agressive towards Draco, but only in response to what he did. But hey, if you are saying that the scene is **not** completely about self-defense, at least I can understand completely what you are saying and where you are coming from. I disagree very strongly but I understand your POV, so I can easily say **till later round** :) See, the problem I had been having in earlier arguments with Magpie ( and it is totally my problem) is that I had been getting an impression that she was saying that it is self defense and not self defense at the same time. I had been struggling to understand how person can defend himself and had an intent to hurt. That is what I am struggling with. because in my head the person who is defending himself by definition does nothing more than **defends** himself. If you are saying that Harry is the same agressor here as Draco, I do not buy it, but at least I see it as consistent with how you describe a scene. Thanks :) Alla From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Feb 19 19:54:03 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:54:03 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective References: Message-ID: <006d01c7545f$b58224e0$468c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165174 > Alla: > > Before Harry used Sectusemptra, he used leg locker and levicorpus, I > think he could not be any less agressive. IMO of course. > > But as I had been saying, I do not have a problem with acknowledging > that Harry was agressive towards Draco, but only in response to what > he > did. > > But hey, if you are saying that the scene is **not** completely about > self-defense, at least I can understand completely what you are > saying > and where you are coming from. I disagree very strongly but I > understand your POV, so I can easily say **till later round** :) > > See, the problem I had been having in earlier arguments with Magpie ( > and it is totally my problem) is that I had been getting an > impression > that she was saying that it is self defense and not self defense at > the > same time. I had been struggling to understand how person can defend > himself and had an intent to hurt. That is what I am struggling with. > because in my head the person who is defending himself by definition > does nothing more than **defends** himself. > > If you are saying that Harry is the same agressor here as Draco, I do > not buy it, but at least I see it as consistent with how you describe > a > scene. Magpie: I think it was my problem--and clearly I should have just let Betsy explain it, because this is totally what I meant. The circumstance in which Harry unleashes his aggression is a self-defensive one, but Harry's guilt comes from his own aggression, which had horrifying results. He could have chosen a number of different spells that would not have had the results this one did--and yes, he did use less aggressive spells earlier, as did Draco. I think Harry's knowledge of his own aggression is what makes him uncomfortable, and that the question of *why* Harry reached for Sectumsempra is a valid question in the scene--just as, from Draco's pov, it is important to ask why he cast Crucio. He hasn't ever been this violent towards Harry either, and Harry hadn't done anything in the scene at all. One of the cool things about the scene for me is that it really *isn't* a fight the way they fight in the past. Why did Harry curse Draco? Because Draco cursed him. Why did Draco curse Harry? Because Harry was there. Both boys are, imo, fighting about things that go beyond that scene. -m From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Feb 19 21:31:53 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 21:31:53 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene- A different outcome In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165175 "va32h" wrote: > My husband is preparing for his third deployment since 9/11. > He has gone on repeated recovery missions, narrowly avoided > car bombs, dodged improvised explosive devices, and spent two > weeks living in a garbage dumpster fending off enemy fire, > and he is plenty tough enough. But he is not proud and thrilled > have killed people. He is filled with guilt and remorse that > will probably haunt him for the rest of his life. It sound to me that your husband must be a very very very brave man, a man who has absolutely positively NOTHING to feel guilty about. In fact the exact opposite is true, he has much to be proud of! The fact that you are still married to the man makes me think you would agree with me on this point. If nevertheless he tortures himself with guilt then it follows logically that he must have judged himself incorrectly, he has made the same error that Harry did. And yes, if you kill an extraordinarily evil man I conclude that the appropriate emotion to have is pride, and obviously anything that action packed is bound to be a thrill, it goes with the territory. No kidding, I admire the hell out of your husband! Eggplant From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Feb 19 22:20:30 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:20:30 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165176 "justcarol67" wrote: Me: >> I really should clear that up, my first name is Pat. Carol: > As in Patrick, right, not Patricia? But I usually go by my middle name, Sam. >[after quoting some stuff from the book] I don't know, but somehow >it seems pretty clear to me that the detentions are for being a > liar and a cheat, not for using a Darkspell in self-defense or > otherwise. Boy oh boy it's not clear to me, nor do I think it's clear to the other teachers exactly why the Potter boy is being punished! > I would hope that your science and engineering teachers > didn't encourage students to claim the results of other > students' research as their own No of course they didn't. Harry wasn't writing a dissertation full of footnotes, he was simply told to make various potions to the best of his ability. And he did as he was asked to do. The fact that he could make those potions in ways that were better than the textbook ways should be praised not condemned. > If Draco could successfully cast the spell, it would be > the kind of short-term Crucio that Harry had already > experienced You mean Crucio where the pain was so hideously astronomically horrible that Harry wanted to die, the Crucio where he really and sincerely wanted to die? > not the unique long-term Crucio inflicted by four > Death Eaters on the two Longbottoms that drove > them to insanity. And how on Earth did you deduce that, and how on Earth did you expect Harry to figure that out in the 20'th of a second he had to think about it? > Harry knows exactly what Crucio is normally about Yes, Harry does indeed know what a Crucio is about, and that is my point. Have you ever been in such pain you wanted to die? Fortunately I haven't, I hope my good luck continues. Eggplant From va32h at comcast.net Mon Feb 19 22:29:11 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:29:11 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene- A different outcome In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165177 Eggplant wrote > It sound to me that your husband must be a very very very brave man, a > man who has absolutely positively NOTHING to feel guilty about. In > fact the exact opposite is true, he has much to be proud of! The fact > that you are still married to the man makes me think you would agree > with me on this point. If nevertheless he tortures himself with guilt > then it follows logically that he must have judged himself > incorrectly, he has made the same error that Harry did. And yes, if > you kill an extraordinarily evil man I conclude that the appropriate > emotion to have is pride, and obviously anything that action packed > is bound to be a thrill, it goes with the territory. > > No kidding, I admire the hell out of your husband! va32h responds: Thank you - and I do mean that sincerely - but I honestly feel that if you had a first hand view of the situation, you would feel differently. Killing is against our human nature - to make this on topic, I'll point out that Slughorn says this to Tom Riddle, who doesn't care, because Riddle is a sociopath. Only sociopaths - people with no conscience or empathy whatsoever - can kill without a speck of remorse. Part of war strategy is dehumanizing the enemy - which we must do in order to get over that natural instinct to preserve, not destroy, human life. In his own way, Harry has dehumanized the Death Eaters - Sirius tells him way back in GoF that the world is not divided into good people and DEs, but realizing that "the bad guys are people too" is a lesson Harry is still learning in HBP. Harry hated Draco, Harry mistrusts Draco, Harry is convinced that Draco is aiding the enemy, but at the moment of truth, watching Draco's blood pouring out of his body, by Harry's own hand, Harry cannot escape the reality that this is a person. A human being. My husband has shot at people whose fate he never uncovered - recovery of the scene and the bodies was someone else's job. But the one incident for which he feels the most pain and regret came at a routine checkpoint. A vehicle did not stop at the checkpoint, but a few feet past. The occupants were ordered out of the vehicle. The driver got out of the van, and walked toward my husband, who shouted at him to stop. The man did not stop, and my husband - in his own words - "blew a hole into his chest the size of a dinner plate." What my husband remembers is the look of shock on the faces of everyone around him. That the street seemed suddenly full of local Iraqis. They were staring at him, terrified. In their faces, he says, he could see the fear and outrage. They were supposed to be the enemy? They were supposed to be the terrorists? There he was, an American soldier, the liberator, the "good guy", standing over the body of an unarmed civilian, shot dead in the street. My husband does not consider himself particularly brave. On the first tour, he was naive, then terrified. The second time, scared, but resolved. This time - quietly determined to get it over with. Which is very much how I see Harry moving through his journey and realization of what must be done to get rid of Voldemort. War and evil are grim realities. Eradicating them are grim responsibilites. Killing - no matter how noble the cause for which one is doing the killing (and I am speaking of Harry's cause here) is nothing to be thrilled and proud about. It is an ugly, dirty, messy business. Of course I am proud of my husband - but far more proud he is able to feel pain for his actions, than the actions themselves. va32h From rduran1216 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 22:57:22 2007 From: rduran1216 at yahoo.com (rduran1216) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:57:22 -0000 Subject: Concealment - a MAJOR Motif of the series Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165178 Concealment of all sorts of kinds has been an absolute constant in this series. In SS, DD "hides" Harry at his aunt and uncle's for protection. The plot revolves around the SS and its protection. Voldemort hides himself in Quirell. DD hides the info about the prophecy in the epiloge of the book. In CoS, the heir of slytherin's identity is hidden by DD, who obviously knows, and allows Harry to discover it for himself. It is the first Horcrux, where the "memory" of Tom Riddle is hidden. Ginny Weasley's involvement in the who thing is hidden until the end...etc. In PoA, we discover that Pettigrew has been in hiding for 13 years following his incident with Sirius. We find out that the info of Lupin being a Werewolf is hidden from the public, we find out that DD takes a hand in hiding Sirius from thenceforth. In GoF, the entire plot revolves around barty Crouch Jr. who had been hidden for a long time. The identity of the one messing with the tournament is hidden. With DD's "glimmer of triumph" we are led to believe that he is hiding information from Harry. He asks Snape to go into stealth to Spy on Voldemort. In OotP, DD remains hidden from nearly the entire story. Sirius is kept in hiding, the grimmauld place thing shows the role of concealment. The mirror is introduced, the spell DD uses in the duel with Voldemort is currently hidden to us. Severus is hidden from the big battle. In HBP, RAB emerges as a possible hidden person, thought to have been dead who is still alive. DD disappears for weeks at a time to an undisclosed location. The truth about the potion, why DD sent them after a "fake" locket, and what role Aberforth has in all this is hidden. In the NAQ section, Rowling says that the question she was never asked was why DD had possession of James Potter's invisibility cloak? Could James have been involved in some kind of stealthy career that has not been described? Could part of his assignment have been hiding Regulus Black? How many of these hidden "events" will be explained? how many Horcuxes are still hidden? Its worth considering rduran1216 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 23:44:57 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 23:44:57 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene- A different outcome In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165180 va32h wrote: > > Thank you - and I do mean that sincerely - but I honestly feel that if you had a first hand view of the situation, you would feel differently. Killing is against our human nature - to make this on topic, I'll point out that Slughorn says this to Tom Riddle, who doesn't care, because Riddle is a sociopath. Only sociopaths - people with no conscience or empathy whatsoever - can kill without a speck of remorse. > > Part of war strategy is dehumanizing the enemy - which we must do in order to get over that natural instinct to preserve, not destroy, human life. > > In his own way, Harry has dehumanized the Death Eaters - Sirius tells him way back in GoF that the world is not divided into good people and DEs, but realizing that "the bad guys are people too" is a lesson Harry is still learning in HBP. Harry hated Draco, Harry mistrusts Draco, Harry is convinced that Draco is aiding the enemy, but at the moment of truth, watching Draco's blood pouring out of his body, by Harry's own hand, Harry cannot escape the reality that this is a person. A human being. > > My husband does not consider himself particularly brave. On the first tour, he was naive, then terrified. The second time, scared, but resolved. This time - quietly determined to get it over with. Which is very much how I see Harry moving through his journey and realization of what must be done to get rid of Voldemort. > > War and evil are grim realities. Eradicating them are grim responsibilites. Killing - no matter how noble the cause for which one is doing the killing (and I am speaking of Harry's cause here) is nothing to be thrilled and proud about. It is an ugly, dirty, messy business. Carol responds: Thank you for this post, which brings up some important themes that appear more prominently in HBP than in the earlier books. One is the grim reality of killing and war (Draco, I hope, has learned that murdering an unarmed old man is anything but glorious, and Fenrir Greyback illustrates the bestial sort of person who enjoys killing for sport. The other is (Greyback aside) the humanity, or perhaps "humanness" is a better word, of the enemy. "Spinner's End" reveals Narcissa, otherwise an unlikeable character in every respect, as a loving and desperate mother and loyal wife. Snape, even if he's a loyal Death Eater, shows her something like compassion and puts his own life at stake for Draco. Even Bellatrix shows a surprising affection for "Cissy." It's a revelation. The Death Eaters and their supporters (counting Snape as a DE here because he's at least playing that role) are human, too. Harry, of course, doesn't witness the scene, but it's an eye opener for the reader, as is the revelation that Snape's interest in the Dark Arts is balanced by amazing Healing skills. Draco's tears do much the same thing for him as Narcissa's did for her in a later scene. We don't empathize with him, of course, since we have a pretty good idea that whatever he's trying to do has to do with killing Dumbledore, but we can pity him. He's terrified, with good reason, of the Dark wizard he used to find so wonderful. And, as we discover later, he's as fearful for his family as for himself. Once Harry grasps what really happened in the Sectumsempra scene, no longer sidetracked by the HBP or Ginny or Quidditch, perhaps he'll remember Draco's tears. Perhaps he'll remember his white-faced hesitation on the tower. He admits to a tiny twinge of pity for Draco--none, of course, for the much-hated Snape, but that's too much to expect of him now. Maybe Draco will be the first step in Harry's progress toward understanding that, Voldemort and Fenrir Greyback excepted, the bad guys have their loves and their values, their pain and their anger, just as he does. I don't think that JKR is writing a novelized video game, where blood is everywhere and the bad guys are barely distinguishable from the good guys. Love for the wizarding world, compassion for the suffering Voldemort has caused to people on both sides--that's what will cause Harry to triumph--not killing off the bad guys as if he were Dirty Harry or the Terminator or some nameless "hero" in the heartless simulated world of a video game. Carol, thinking that perhaps we should look at Dumbledore's values to determine where JKR is taking Harry in the seventh stage of his journey to adulthood and victory over Voldemort From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 19 23:56:38 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 23:56:38 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165181 Carol earlier: > > >[after quoting some stuff from the book] I don't know, but somehow it seems pretty clear to me that the detentions are for being a liar and a cheat, not for using a Dark spell in self-defense or otherwise. > Eggplant: > Boy oh boy it's not clear to me, nor do I think it's clear to the other teachers exactly why the Potter boy is being punished! Carol again: Well, canon says that the detentions are for being a liar and a cheat, as I just demonstrated. *Why* Snape chose to punish him for those offenses rather than for using Sectumsempra is debatable, as is how much the other teachers knew. All I know is that Snape, Harry, and JKR all chose to focus on something other than that curse and its implications. And not one of them raises the question of self-defense. Now if Harry thought it was all terribly unfair, he could have chosen to defend himself to McGonnagall, but apparently, he just suffered through her fifteen-minute tongue lashing. That he didn't get any more from it than he got from Snape's detentions seems clear. He's not defending himself, but he defends the HBP, and he hides his precious book from Snape and lies about it. And it's that dishonesty, not his use of the Dark spell, that Snape is concerned about. It's rather like a kid who takes his parents' car without permission, gets into a wreck, and then lies about it. It's the lying more than the car borrowing or the damage to the car that really concerns the parents. Or it would me. Carol earlier: > > > I would hope that your science and engineering teachers didn't encourage students to claim the results of other students' research as their own > Eggplant: > No of course they didn't. Harry wasn't writing a dissertation full of footnotes, he was simply told to make various potions to the best of his ability. And he did as he was asked to do. The fact that he could make those potions in ways that were better than the textbook ways should be praised not condemned. Carol again: But Harry *couldn't* make better potions than the textbook. The HBP could and wrote his notes in the margins, not intending them to be used by someother kid twenty years later. Harry has no skill in Potions. He's done no work. All he's done is take credit for someone else's ideas. No wonder that Hermione is furious when he gets more credit for handing Slughorn a Bezoar (not even that is his own idea) than she does for showing that she's mastered the material in the book. (Granted, she's not a Potions genius like young Snape, who experimented outside of class to come up with his improvements, but at least she knows the material, does the work, and understands Golpalott's Law.) Harry's getting credit for someone else's work just as much as he would be if he wrote an essay on bezoars using Hermione's notes without reading the assigned work. (In fact, there's quite a lot of intellectual dishonesty of that sort in these books.) Slughorn thinks that Harry's a Potions genius but the genius is Teen!Snape. Snape did the work; Harry gets the credit. How is that commendable? Maybe I should take credit for JK Rowling's ideas if I can somehow get away with it? I could get some fame and riches that I deserve as much as Harry deserves his high marks and Slughorn's praise. Carol earlier: > > If Draco could successfully cast the spell, it would be the kind of short-term Crucio that Harry had already experienced > Eggplant: > You mean Crucio where the pain was so hideously astronomically horrible that Harry wanted to die, the Crucio where he really and sincerely wanted to die? > Carol again: Yes, that one. The excruciating pain for which Crucio is named. The torture spell as it's normally used. (Assuming that Draco knew how to cast it, which Harry takes for granted.) Carol earlier: > > not the unique long-term Crucio inflicted by four Death Eaters on the two Longbottoms that drove them to insanity. > Eggplant: > And how on Earth did you deduce that, and how on Earth did you expect Harry to figure that out in the 20'th of a second he had to think about it? Carol: He's not *deducing* anything. He's not thinking about the Longbottoms. He's remembering his own horrible experience. I'm not arguing that Harry doesn't expect the spell to cause excruciating pain, quite the contrary. I'm arguing that Harry was not expecting the spell to drive him to *insanity*. He knows exactly what a Crucio normally does, having experienced its excruciating pain twice himself. And surely he wouldn't expect Draco's Crucio to be worse than Voldemort's. Carol earlier: > > Harry knows exactly what Crucio is normally about > Eggplant: > Yes, Harry does indeed know what a Crucio is about, and that is my point. Have you ever been in such pain you wanted to die? Fortunately I haven't, I hope my good luck continues. Carol: Exactly. He's expecting pain, excruciating pain, which he knows will be short-term as it was with Voldemort (this is Draco Malfoy, after all) but nevertheless does not want to feel again. He's not expecting to end up in the closed ward with the Longbottoms. He's expecting to be tortured. There's no need to exaggerate and say that he's expecting insanity as well, as the poster I was disagreeing with did. Carol, who agrees with your point but thinks that you're missing hers (it's torture, not insanity, that Harry fears) From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Feb 20 07:10:17 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 07:10:17 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165182 "justcarol67" wrote: > canon says that the detentions are for > being a liar and a cheat, as I just demonstrated. WHAT?! You have demonstrated no such thing. Sure, Snape suspected Harry was lying, but he could prove nothing. > Harry *couldn't* make better potions than the textbook. If he couldn't make better potions it is beyond dispute that he found better ways to make those potions. Absolutely beyond dispute. > Harry's getting credit for someone else's work just > as much as he would be if he wrote an essay That is quite simply baloney. There is not a single chemistry professor on planet Earth that would not praise a student to high heaven who had found (and I don't care how he had found it) a way to perform an experiment that was superior to the way the textbook described. I can't emphasize that enough, HE WOULD BE PRAISED! > Draco's tears do much the same thing for him > as Narcissa's did for her in a later scene. Draco's tears might have made me feel more sympathetic toward him if a fraction of a second later he hadn't tried to torture Harry. As for Harry dehumanizing the Death Eaters, well yes there is some truth to that, but if you are in a war you will kill people, and to keep your sanity dehumanizing is something you must do. In every war good people do horrible things. > He's expecting pain, excruciating pain, which he knows will be > short-term as it was with Voldemort (this is Draco Malfoy, > after all) but nevertheless does not want to feel again. He's > not expecting to end up in the closed ward with the Longbottoms. I don't understand your point. Is Harry supposed to think in the 20'th of a second he had to think about it that "Maybe this spell won't drive me insane, maybe it will just cause pain so enormous I will want to die, so when I try to defend myself I should take every precaution I can think of to make sure that my torturer is not harmed in any way". That's just nuts. Eggplant From muellem at bc.edu Tue Feb 20 12:07:22 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 12:07:22 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165183 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > That is quite simply baloney. There is not a single chemistry > professor on planet Earth that would not praise a student to high > heaven who had found (and I don't care how he had found it) a way to > perform an experiment that was superior to the way the textbook > described. I can't emphasize that enough, HE WOULD BE PRAISED! > colebiancardi: yes, as Slughorn praised Harry. But an honest student would have given credit where credit was due. An honest student would have cited references to where they got that knowledge. If I write an essay, I better cite all my references or I will flunk that course, no matter how brilliant my essay is. Because my essay really isn't mine as I used other sources. Harry wasn't an honest student here. He took credit for someone else's work and that is why Snape called him a liar & a cheat. Snape somehow *knew*, in my opinion, that Harry was not the potions genuis that Slughorn and the rest of the school (Ron & Hermione excluded) think he is and that Harry was using the HBP's book. colebiancardi(who has to sign an agreement every semester to state her work is her own, otherwise I can get expelled) From Vexingconfection at aol.com Tue Feb 20 13:04:53 2007 From: Vexingconfection at aol.com (Vexingconfection at aol.com) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 08:04:53 EST Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165184 eggplant107 wrote: > That is quite simply baloney. There is not a single chemistry > professor on planet Earth that would not praise a student to high > heaven who had found (and I don't care how he had found it) a way > to perform an experiment that was superior to the way the textbook > described. I can't emphasize that enough, HE WOULD BE PRAISED! colebiancardi: > yes, as Slughorn praised Harry. But an honest student would have > given credit where credit was due. An honest student would have > cited references to where they got that knowledge. If I write an > essay, I better cite all my references or I will flunk that > course, no matter how brilliant my essay is. Because my essay > really isn't mine as I used other sources. Harry wasn't an honest > student here. He took credit for someone else's work and that is > why Snape called him a liar & a cheat. Snape somehow *knew*, in my > opinion, that Harry was not the potions genuis that Slughorn and > the rest of the school (Ron & Hermione excluded) think he is and > that Harry was using the HBP's book. Pardon my ignorance on this and understand-ignorance never equates to an absence of opinion as much as one might appreciate that to be.... Harry did not steal work as much as perform his own experimentation. He demonstrated both irreverence and irresponsibility but not in my opinion dishonesty. IMO he was using the potions class to further his investigation into the HBP's book. He did not take credit for any work professionally. He did not know who the Prince was. Remember, he did not even want to buy the same broom as Draco-wanted nothing the other thought valuable. He had less regard for Snape knowing his history, so I doubt he would have used the book to the extent he did. A better question would be, if Snape knew there were easier and more gainful methods to produce the same or better results in the spells or potions he was teaching, why did he not instruct his students on their use? What was Snape's motivation to not give his students the fullest and most useful understanding and application of the craft? If it was because they were not MoM approved, he could have had them approved or gone through the Headmaster to instruct them. I am sure we have all had classes on evolution in which the teacher first issues the statement or disclaimer, "This may or may not be in your belief system but it's part of science and has not yet been proved or disproved. It is here for evaluation." Many of the notations made were simply how to extract juices. These were simple tricks that could have been taught. Here is something else I will mention and hopefully not bring so much criticism that you toss me from your group. Martin Luther King, Jr., plagiarized most of his work while in college. It's a known fact. While we may make allowances for presidents and famous celebrities for perjury and plagiarization... a 15(?) yr old orphaned wizard who comes from a loveless home and is facing the Dark lord is held to higher standards. I think he acted within his character, reckless and youthful but not nefariously. I think JKR has been true to her character. Vexingconfection From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 14:32:53 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:32:53 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165185 Vexingconfection wrote: > Pardon my ignorance on this and understand-ignorance never equates to an absence of opinion as much as one might appreciate that to be.... Harry did not steal work as much as perform his own experimentation. He demonstrated both irreverence and irresponsibility but not in my opinion dishonesty. IMO he was using the potions class to further his investigation into the HBP's book. He did not take credit for any work professionally. He did not know who the Prince was. > > A better question would be, if Snape knew there were easier and more gainful methods to produce the same or better results in the spells or potions he was teaching, why did he not instruct his students on their use? What was Snape's motivation to not give his students the fullest and most useful understanding and application of the craft? If it was because they were not MoM approved, he could > have had them approved or gone through the Headmaster to instruct them. I am sure we have all had classes on evolution in which the teacher first issues the statement or disclaimer, "This may or may not be in your belief system but it's part of science and has not yet been proved or disproved. It is here for evaluation." Many of the notations made were simply how to extract juices. These were simple tricks that could have been taught. > > Carol responds: The only "experimentation" that Harry did was to try out the Prince's notes to see if they worked. The Prince (Snape) had worked out those experiments on his own and jotted down the results of his research in the margins of his book. Harry is taking credit for work he did not do, receiving praise from Slughorn for being a Potions "natural," when he doesn't even understand the theory behind the Potions. (See his confusion over Golpalott's Law.) All he's doing is following the Prince's directions, not working things out on his own. And he knows it--which is why he's afraid that Snape will tell Slughorn how he's "earning" those marks. As for Harry's not knowing that the book is Snape's, of course he wouldn't use the Potions hints if he knew whose they were, but how is that to his credit? It's okay to use someeone's ideas unless those ideas are Snape's? That makes no sense at all. Had he used and taken credit for those in Snape's class rather than Slughorn's, he'd have been caught and punished immediately. Snape would have known that those improvements were his. It is intellectual dishonesty to use someone else's ideas without crediting them, whether it's to receive higher marks or a research contract. The fact that Harry is not a professional researcher doesn't make what he's doing right. As for Snape's not making his ideas public, when have we ever seen him assign potions directily from the book? He always writes them on the board with his wand. It's extremely likely, then, that the potions directions he assigns are his own improved versions that he's memorized (note that he knows exactly what can go wrong at every step). Hermione and Draco get better marks in Snape's class than in Slughorn's because Slughorn teaches from the book. Harry alone has the advantage of Snape's superior knowledge and experiments, but he's not sharing with anyone, not coming clean that his brilliant inspirations are not his own. The whole reason that civilized countries have copyright laws and punishments for plagiarism is that intellectual dishonesty--taking credit for someone else's work--is wrong. It's stealing ideas. Try taking an essay from the Internet and presenting it to your English professor as your own and see what happens. Carol, who wonders if certain posters will now argue that Harry didn't lie to Snape in saying that his nickname is Roonil Wazlib and that he found Sectumsempra in a library book From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue Feb 20 14:32:47 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:32:47 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165186 Vexingconfection: > Pardon my ignorance on this and understand-ignorance never equates to an absence of opinion as much as one might appreciate that to be.... Harry did not steal work as much as perform his own experimentation. He demonstrated both irreverence and irresponsibility but not in my opinion dishonesty. IMO he was using the potions class to further his investigation into the HBP's book. He did not take credit for any work professionally. He did not know who the Prince was. Ceridwen: This thread seems to be compelling. I don't know why we all like spending so much time in the bathroom, but there it is! The scene was jarring. We all have our opinions on it, and on everything surrounding it. I think it was a pivotal scene. Harry did steal the work. I've gone back to school after a break of (hang on, math alert, headache imminent) thirty-two years. We can be expelled for not giving the correct citations in our work. Not just in English and Literature classes, but in science classes, too. Nothing I've done so far is at a professional level, but the consequences are still the same. And in scientific papers, the authors cite all of the research they have drawn on for their studies, whether the paper is to be published, or merely to be handed in for a class. There would have been no shame in telling Slughorn that there were notes in his textbook that helped him. He couldn't cite the author, since he only knew a nick-name and not a real name... (Oh, tangent - Was that why Snape said he knew what a nick-name was? Was this another clue left by JKR to the Prince's identity?) ...but he could have mentioned that the innovations were not his own. He wasn't testing the Prince's methods, he was using them. We're privy to Harry's thoughts. He didn't decide to test and see if the notes in his book were better, he used them in an attempt to win the Felix. His potion, to that point, wasn't going very well. When the stirring notation worked, he felt confident enough to use the Prince's notes in other potions. He had enough confidence in the Prince to think that he would get better marks by using these notes. He never put himself on a level to test the Prince's innovations. Vexingconfection: > A better question would be, if Snape knew there were easier and more gainful methods to produce the same or better results in the spells or potions he was teaching, why did he not instruct his students on their use? What was Snape's motivation to not give his students the fullest and most useful understanding and application of the craft? *(some snippage done)* Ceridwen: Quite a few people have mentioned that Snape has always been shown as putting the instructions for the various potions on the board. Since the students have their books, why does he do that? It's quite possible that he includes his amended instructions in the recipes he gives his class. He does not tell them to work from their books. Vexingconfection: > Here is something else I will mention and hopefully not bring so much criticism that you toss me from your group. Martin Luther King, Jr., plagiarized most of his work while in college. It's a known fact. While we may make allowances for presidents and famous celebrities for perjury and plagiarization... a 15(?) yr old orphaned wizard who comes from a loveless home and is facing the Dark lord is held to higher standards. I think he acted within his character, reckless and youthful but not nefariously. I think JKR has been true to her character. Ceridwen: If Martin Luther King, Jr. plagarized, then he did wrong. If someone looks at someone else's test to get the right answer, they are wrong, and in the school I attend, that is known as plagarism also. If I ask my husband to do my math homework for me, I'm wrong, and I'm not learning anything at the same time. If I take someone else's work and ideas and present them as my own, I have plagarized. I would be liable to be expelled. If Martin Luther King, Jr. had been caught plagarizing, he also would have been liable for expulsion. I am not holding Harry to a higher standard than I hold a young MLK, various presidents in their youths, my children, or myself. As a sixteen year old, he is nearly an adult in his society. He needs to be behaving like the near-adult he is. I am holding Harry to the same standards by which I and everyone I know have to live. I expect that much from the hero of the series. Ceridwen. From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Tue Feb 20 14:43:44 2007 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 09:43:44 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C92314A7C3D41B-11E0-9D9@FWM-D40.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165187 Vexingconfection: Pardon my ignorance on this and understand-ignorance never equates to an absence of opinion as much as one might appreciate that to be.... Harry did not steal work as much as perform his own experimentation. He demonstrated both irreverence and irresponsibility but not in my opinion dishonesty. IMO he was using the potions class to further his investigation into the HBP's book. He did not take credit for any work professionally. He did not know who the Prince was. Oryomai: But Harry DID NOT perform his own experimentation! The book told him what to do -- it was just as if he was following a different set of instructions. At my school (Duquense University), the technical cheating policy is that it doesn't even matter if you did it on purpose or not. Last semester, when my partner plagarized websites, I could've gotten expelled as well. Harry stole the work. When you take someone else's notes and use them, and do not credit them even when directly asked about it, you're cheating. Vexingconfection: A better question would be, if Snape knew there were easier and more gainful methods to produce the same or better results in the spells or potions he was teaching, why did he not instruct his students on their use? What was Snape's motivation to not give his students the fullest and most useful understanding and application of the craft? If it was because they were not MoM approved, he could have had them approved or gone through the Headmaster to instruct them. I am sure we have all had classes on evolution in which the teacher first issues the statement or disclaimer, "This may or may not be in your belief system but it's part of science and has not yet been proved or disproved. It is here for evaluation." Many of the notations made were simply how to extract juices. These were simple tricks that could have been taught. Oryomai: How do we know Severus *didn't* teach them? He's not teaching Harry Potions this year, so we do not know if he had planned on showing the 6th year class these tricks or not. Just because Slughorn doesn't know/teach them does not mean that Severus had not done so in the past. We cannot base what Severus would've taught off of what Slughorn does. Vexingconfection: Here is something else I will mention and hopefully not bring so much criticism that you toss me from your group. Martin Luther King, Jr., plagiarized most of his work while in college. It's a known fact. While we may make allowances for presidents and famous celebrities for perjury and plagiarization... a 15(?) yr old orphaned wizard who comes from a loveless home and is facing the Dark lord is held to higher standards. I think he acted within his character, reckless and youthful but not nefariously. I think JKR has been true to her character. Oryomai: Um...this is not well-known. I have just lost pretty much all respect for MLK Jr. now. Academic cheating is not something that people should admire in anyone. I'm not sure who you're talking about when you say that we make allowances for presidents and famous celebrities -- but I attempt not to make any exceptions on cheating (but I am human!). While I don't think Harry should be stoned to death or anything for his use of the Potions Book, I think that we cannot look beyond the fact that Harry cheated. Harry even seems to know this -- when Severus asked for his book, Harry took Ron's instead. That seems to indicate a guilty conscience to me.... Oryomai, who is having lots of trouble with spacing for some reason and apologizes! ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eviljunglechicken at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 14:52:59 2007 From: eviljunglechicken at yahoo.com (eviljunglechicken) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:52:59 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165188 colebiancardi: > > yes, as Slughorn praised Harry. But an honest student would have > > given credit where credit was due. An honest student would have > > cited references to where they got that knowledge. If I write an > > essay, I better cite all my references or I will flunk that > > course, no matter how brilliant my essay is. Because my essay > > really isn't mine as I used other sources. Harry wasn't an > > honest student here. He took credit for someone else's work and > > that is why Snape called him a liar & a cheat. Snape somehow > > *knew*, in my opinion, that Harry was not the potions genuis that > > Slughorn and the rest of the school (Ron & Hermione excluded) > > think he is and that Harry was using the HBP's book. eviljunglechicken: I agree. Slughorn believes Harry's work in potions is Harry's own creation and Harry does nothing to dissuade him of that notion. Plagiarism is defined as the following: noun 1. the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work. 2. something used and represented in this manner. the act of plagiarizing; taking someone's words or ideas as if they were your own Harry is taking credit for Snape's work. Why doesn't Harry admit he found notes by the Halfblood Prince which improves upon potions as they are being taught with the sources available to the other students? Not doing so is dishonest. It is unethical. Vexingconfection: > He did not take credit for any work professionally. He did not know > who the Prince was. Eviljunglechicken: While I was in school and not yet a professional, I was still expected to cite my sources. I was not expected to claim someone else's ideas as my own. He did not know who the Prince was so he could not cite him as anything except that, but he knew the work was that of the Halfblood Prince. Of all the authors I have cited in my life, I didn't know the vast majority of them either. I knew them as names which may or may not have been pen names for some. Not knowing the Halfblood Prince was actually Severus Snape does not make his notes Harry's own ideas. Vexingconfection: > Remember, he did not even want to buy the same broom as Draco- > wanted nothing the other thought valuable. He had less regard for > Snape knowing his history, so I doubt he would have used the book > to the extent he did. Eviljunglechicken: I'm not sure what your point is here. Even if he would not have used the book if he knew the author of the notes, the matter in question is claiming this Halfblood Prince's ideas as his own ideas. Vexingconfection: > A better question would be, if Snape knew there were easier and > more gainful methods to produce the same or better results in the > spells or potions he was teaching, why did he not instruct his > students on their use? What was Snape's motivation to not give his > students the fullest and most useful understanding and application > of the craft? Eviljunglechicken: I don't know that I would say it's a better question. It is a different question and perhaps one which more people would find interesting to explore. Vexingconfection: > While we may make allowances for presidents and famous celebrities > for perjury and plagiarization... Eviljunglechicken: Isn't the pertinent point being that these cases are perjury and plagiarism? Lying and taking credit for someone else's work. Vexingconfection: > a 15(?) yr old orphaned wizard who comes from a loveless home and > is facing the Dark lord is held to higher standards. Eviljunglechicken: I don't know how he is being held to a higher standard. If a president takes credit for someone else's work or if I do or if Harry Potter does, it is still plagiarism. It doesn't magically not become its definition based on who is committing the act. I'm not arguing the "punishment" for this dishonesty is or can be handed out unevenly. Most of the responses to this question have only been the consideration of what was Harry guilty of, not what his "sentence" should be. Vexingconfection: > I think he acted within his character, reckless and youthful but > not nefariously. I think JKR has been true to her character. Eviljunglechicken: I don't think he acted extremely wickedly either. But he did act dishonestly as well as reckless. Eviljunglechicken ELFY NOTE: Eviljunglechicken, could you please contact the list elves at the owner address? The email address we have for your account is bouncing messages. The owner address is HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com Thanks! -- Shorty Elf From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 20 16:19:58 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 16:19:58 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165189 Vexingconfection > Pardon my ignorance on this and understand-ignorance never equates to an absence of opinion as much as one might appreciate that to be.... Harry did not steal work as much as perform his own experimentation. He demonstrated both irreverence and irresponsibility but not in my opinion dishonesty. IMO he was using the potions class to further his investigation into the HBP's book. He did not take credit for any work professionally. He did not know who the Prince was. Magpie: It's made pretty clear in canon that he is being dishonest and not experimenting in the way you're using it--though I understand the obvious question of what's so bad about using better instructions in Potions. The entire class is working with one set of instructions that are inferior. Harry has a different set of instructions that make his Potions come out better. I don't know whether work in school is considered professional, but this kind of thing is certainly against the rules in school. It's *worse* to cheat professionally in terms of the consequences, but you're doing the same thing. Slughorn thinks that Harry is just particularly good at making the same instructions as everyone else work better, and of course that's not true. Harry has no idea why the Prince's instructions work better. He has none of the instinctive "grasp" of Potions the Prince does, which is what Slughorn is crediting him for. Even his trick with the bezoar isn't his own--and Harry himself always knows this. That's why he thinks of the Prince as almost a friend whispering answers in his ear. That is where Harry is being dishonest and Ron and Hermione certainly know it. Everyone else just knows he must be doing something underhanded because he's not that good in Potions. It's not the best way to show cheating since Harry is following a recipe just like everyone else, but JKR doesn't seem to be making any bones about that being what she's *trying* to show. I mean, come on--Harry a Potions genius? When he doesn't even understand the law he's supposed to be working on and just takes a chance on using somebody else's joke. He's putting himself across as something he isn't and he knows it. Vexingconfection > Remember, he did not even want to buy the same broom as Draco- wanted nothing the other thought valuable. He had less regard for Snape knowing his history, so I doubt he would have used the book to the extent he did. A better question would be, if Snape knew there were easier and more gainful methods to produce the same or better results in the spells or potions he was teaching, why did he not instruct his students on their use? What was Snape's motivation to not give his students the fullest and most useful understanding and application of the craft? If it was because they were not MoM approved, he could > have had them approved or gone through the Headmaster to instruct them. I am sure we have all had classes on evolution in which the teacher first issues the statement or disclaimer, "This may or may not be in your belief system but it's part of science and has not yet been proved or disproved. It is here for evaluation." Many of the notations made were simply how to extract juices. These were simple tricks that could have been taught. Magpie: Not sure what you're getting at here. There's no reason to think Snape doesn't teach the kids the best methods, since in *his* class the people who do the best are the ones that understand Potions the best. People like Hermione who are also far more equipped to tackle the assignments in this class. The reason Harry isn't able to approach his NEWT assignments at their level is a combination of his not having the same grasp they do of the subject, a grasp they (and the rest of the class) seems to have gotten from their classes. Harry isn't awful at Potions, but we know that some people in the class are ahead of him. In his class everyone works from the same instructions--Harry intentionally keeps the better instructions for himself in sixth year so that he can appear to be better at the subject than he is. Vexingconfection: > Here is something else I will mention and hopefully not bring so much criticism that you toss me from your group. Martin Luther King, Jr., plagiarized most of his work while in college. It's a known fact. While we may make allowances for presidents and famous celebrities for perjury and plagiarization... a 15(?) yr old orphaned wizard who comes from a loveless home and is facing the Dark lord is held to > higher standards. I think he acted within his character, reckless and > youthful but not nefariously. I think JKR has been true to her character. Magpie: I'm not sure why you would worry you'd be tossed from the group for telling us MLK plagiarized, but I don't know what you mean about making allowances. Are you suggesting that Harry is such a woobie it's mean to call a spade a spade when it comes to his cheating? Or that it's not cheating when people lik MLK Jr. do it? I don't see anybody accusing JKR of not being true to her character here, they're arguing that using somebody else's work to pretend you have a grasp of Potions when you don't is obviously dishonest. Not only does Harry seem to see himself as being given an unfair advantage in the class it's hard to imagine he'd be okay if that unfair advantage went to someone else. Nobody else in the class is too happy with it. If Harry were competing on an even playing field he'd have the same place in the class he always has--not at the top. -m From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 16:36:25 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 16:36:25 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165190 > Carol responds: > As for Snape's not making his ideas public, when have we ever seen him > assign potions directily from the book? He always writes them on the > board with his wand. It's extremely likely, then, that the potions > directions he assigns are his own improved versions that he's > memorized (note that he knows exactly what can go wrong at every > step). Hermione and Draco get better marks in Snape's class than in > Slughorn's because Slughorn teaches from the book. Harry alone has the > advantage of Snape's superior knowledge and experiments, but he's not > sharing with anyone, not coming clean that his brilliant inspirations > are not his own. > Neri: Where is the canon that Hermione and Draco get better marks in Snape's class than in Slughorn's? And more to the point, where is the canon that they learn better or produce better potions in Snape's lessons than in Slughorn's? On the contrary, it seems to me that it is Harry who is doing better in Slughorn's class, not the rest of the class doing worse. It definitely sounds like Harry was getting much better results, not only in respect to the other students, but also in respect to his own past results in Snape's class. This implies that it was Harry who was suddenly using improved instructions, and not the other students suddenly using degraded instructions. I conclude that Snape wasn't including his own tips in his directions to the students. > Carol: > The whole reason that civilized countries have copyright laws and > punishments for plagiarism is that intellectual dishonesty--taking > credit for someone else's work--is wrong. It's stealing ideas. Try > taking an essay from the Internet and presenting it to your English > professor as your own and see what happens. > Neri: Crediting a source in a written assay is usually a very different thing from using a manual or supportive material in a hands-on laboratory lesson. As an instructor in a laboratory course in the university I was always impressed when seeing a student doing lab work with the help of such material, especially if that material was not officially recommended (because that would mean that the student had probably bothered to research for it in the library or even buy it. Most students only use the official lab manual and many don't bother to read even that). Granted, I'd be slightly less impressed if that student used, say, comments written by another student of that same course in a previous year (because it probably means he/she had got it by chance or good connections, and hadn't actually bothered to search the library for it) but I certainly wouldn't object, as long as it contained good and safe instructions, and I'd certainly never think of demanding that the source would be credited. These nuances depend a lot on culture, institution, faculty and subject. We don't know what the relevant rules in Hogwarts are. But Hermione probably knows, and she dislikes the Prince from the beginning, and yet AFAIK she never tells Harry that he's breaking any rules, or that he might get a detention or be expelled if he's caught. Yes, I think Harry wasn't exactly playing fair when achieving his fame based on material he never told his teacher or other students about. But then, academic life at Hogwarts don't strike me as very fair to begin with. It was also not fair that Harry was picked on by his potions teacher for five years, but do we ever hear any objections from any staff member? Neri From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Feb 20 17:21:27 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:21:27 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165191 colebiancardi" wrote: > an honest student would have given credit > where credit was due. An honest student > would have cited references to where they > got that knowledge. If I write an essay[ ] But Harry wasn't writing an essay, he wasn't writing anything, he was simply told to make various potions and he did so. Obviously Slughorn knew Harry must be doing something that the other students were not, but he never asked where he got the knowledge and Harry didn't volunteer the information. I wouldn't have either, and despite the noises of moral outrage I tend to hear around here I don't believe I'm radically different from most people in that respect. Eggplant From muellem at bc.edu Tue Feb 20 17:23:01 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:23:01 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165192 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Neri" wrote: > Where is the canon that Hermione and Draco get better marks in Snape's > class than in Slughorn's? And more to the point, where is the canon > that they learn better or produce better potions in Snape's lessons > than in Slughorn's? > > On the contrary, it seems to me that it is Harry who is doing better > in Slughorn's class, not the rest of the class doing worse. It > definitely sounds like Harry was getting much better results, not only > in respect to the other students, but also in respect to his own past > results in Snape's class. This implies that it was Harry who was > suddenly using improved instructions, and not the other students > suddenly using degraded instructions. I conclude that Snape wasn't > including his own tips in his directions to the students. > colebiancardi: Snape required an "O" level to get into his NEWT classes. Draco & Hermione got "O" to continue on to the 6th year. Harry & Ron did not get "O" and they had not intended to take Potions in the 6th year, because Snape told his class he didn't take anything less than an "O" level. However, Slughorn does take "E", so that is why Harry & Ron got into Sluggy's class. So, Hermoine & Draco did get high marks in Snape's class. I don't know how they are fairing in Slughorn's class - I am sure they are still getting high marks, but Sluggy is all about Harry & his natural talent, which it isn't. Since we've read that Snape admonishes Harry for not reading the instructions on the board, I can only conclude that what Snape writes on the board are the improved instructions. Harry is getting better results in the 6th year because a) Snape isn't teaching Potions and b) he has the HBP's notes. He outshines the rest of the class because he has Snape's notes, whereas the others don't and are dealing with the straight text. colebiancardi From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 20 17:20:55 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:20:55 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165193 > Neri: > Where is the canon that Hermione and Draco get better marks in Snape's > class than in Slughorn's? And more to the point, where is the canon > that they learn better or produce better potions in Snape's lessons > than in Slughorn's? Magpie: When do you remember Hermione so frazzled in Snape's class? Hermione and Draco both get O's on their OWLS and Harry gets an E. The lessons in NEWT level are harder, so it's not unusual that they are finding it more difficult. The difference in Slughorn's class is that Harry is suddenly progressing ahead of the rest of the class, because for the first time everyone else is working with bad instructions. Neri:> > On the contrary, it seems to me that it is Harry who is doing better > in Slughorn's class, not the rest of the class doing worse. It > definitely sounds like Harry was getting much better results, not only > in respect to the other students, but also in respect to his own past > results in Snape's class. This implies that it was Harry who was > suddenly using improved instructions, and not the other students > suddenly using degraded instructions. I conclude that Snape wasn't > including his own tips in his directions to the students. Magpie: I thought the exact opposite was obvious. Suddenly Hermione is struggling and Harry is breezing through, even though Hermione still understands the material better than Harry does. Harry was suddenly using instructions better than the ones being used by the rest of the class. Instructions he was also paying more attention to than he did to Snape--remember there are times when Harry's Potion turns out badly where Snape points to the instructions and Harry has done them wrong--unlike Hermione in the same class. So as far as I can see, the lesson has always been to follow Snape's instructions, which Harry sometimes doesn't because he's distracted and, perhaps, he doesn't have as instinctive a grasp of the subject that he can be distracted and still get it right. He's reliant on following the instructions to the letter--which is fine, but explains why he does so much better than the class when he's got better instructions he's more eager to follow correctly. > > Neri: > Crediting a source in a written assay is usually a very different > thing from using a manual or supportive material in a hands-on > laboratory lesson. As an instructor in a laboratory course in the > university I was always impressed when seeing a student doing lab work > with the help of such material, especially if that material was not > officially recommended (because that would mean that the student had > probably bothered to research for it in the library or even buy it. > Most students only use the official lab manual and many don't bother > to read even that). Granted, I'd be slightly less impressed if that > student used, say, comments written by another student of that same > course in a previous year (because it probably means he/she had got it > by chance or good connections, and hadn't actually bothered to search > the library for it) but I certainly wouldn't object, as long as it > contained good and safe instructions, and I'd certainly never think of > demanding that the source would be credited. Magpie: Yes, and in this case the notes and work aren't the issue. The issue is Harry working at an unfair advantage to the rest of the class, which he himself never denies he is doing, and allowing the teacher to believe that his better results are due to his own instinctive changes in the Potions. It's not a federal crime, but there's no way around the fact that Harry is intentionally lying about just figuring things out rather than getting them from someone else. Neri: > These nuances depend a lot on culture, institution, faculty and > subject. We don't know what the relevant rules in Hogwarts are. But > Hermione probably knows, and she dislikes the Prince from the > beginning, and yet AFAIK she never tells Harry that he's breaking any > rules, or that he might get a detention or be expelled if he's caught. > Yes, I think Harry wasn't exactly playing fair when achieving his fame > based on material he never told his teacher or other students about. > But then, academic life at Hogwarts don't strike me as very fair to > begin with. It was also not fair that Harry was picked on by his > potions teacher for five years, but do we ever hear any objections > from any staff member? Magpie: No, she doesn't tell him he's breaking rules. But she obviously thinks he's getting credit for things he doesn't deserve credit for, which is true. I'm a little surprised that something that Harry himself always recognizes as dishonest is getting defended by stuff like "Well, who cares about classes being fair?" or "Why's it important to learn the subject in school?" It's not fair that Harry had a mean teacher for 5 years that didn't like him so he's getting payback through getting credit for being a Potions whiz when he isn't in return? Since when do those things go together? (And if that is what he is doing, I expect Snape's debt is paid in full now and nobody can consider him unfair anymore.) -m From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Feb 20 17:59:26 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:59:26 -0000 Subject: Voldermort learning the prophecy? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165195 So...what's up for the prophecy in DH? I was a little surprised when Voldemort gave up on figuring it out in HBP. Given Voldemort's obsessive nature and utter belief in the prophecy, I'm guessing he will seek it out again in the belief there's something about why Harry thwarts him at every turn. At least I think that's what JKR is going for, that even though Harry continues to escape Voldemort by love LV underestimates that power and therefore will continue to believe there's more to Harry. Since Voldemort knows Trelawney is the Seer in question you'd think he would make an *attempt* to get to her (unless he knows something we don't, i.e., you can't magically get something from a person who channelled information she doesn't remember). Even if she wasn't kidnapped out of the Vanishing Cabinent the tower night, it makes sense to me LV turned his focus to removing Dumbledore first in order to clear the way to Harry and possibly Trelawney (and who knows, maybe a Horcrux hidden at Hogwarts?). Another thought--how would knowing the prophecy change his strategy? I'm guessing Voldemort would nix love as Harry's power and instead attempt to figure out what magical power Harry could have that Voldemort doesn't know about. Or, since he says himself in the graveyard that love was his downfall at GH and in the MOM again he must have at least an inkling of what drove him out, would he guess Harry's power is love even if he continues to underestimate it? Okay, that's my brainstorming. Hope others have some thoughts about this topic. Jen From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 18:04:31 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:04:31 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165196 vexingconfection: > He did not take credit for any work professionally. He did not know who the Prince was. zgirnius: Plagiarism is still plagiarism even when no money is made from it. vexingconfection: > A better question would be, if Snape knew there were easier and more gainful methods to produce the same or better results in the spells or potions he was teaching, why did he not instruct his students on their use? zgirnius: It is my opinion that Snape did. He is said to write potions instruction on the board - I believe this is because he taught the improved methids. This also explains why Hermione went from making perfect potions every time, to having some difficulty, while Harry experienced the opposite in HBP. She went from using the improved Potions instructions to not having them available; Harry, who could not be bothered to pay close attention to Snape, profoited from his know-how for the first time by using the Prince's book vexingconfection: > Here is something else I will mention and hopefully not bring so much criticism that you toss me from your group. Martin Luther King, Jr., plagiarized most of his work while in college. It's a known fact. While we may make allowances for presidents and famous celebrities for perjury and plagiarization... zgirnius: Personally, I don't make allowances for presidents and public figures. There are aspects of Dr. King's life that are not admirable, I have no problem reading such an opinion or stating it myself. He was also a brave and inspirational leader for the Civil Rights Movement in the US, and for that he deserves to be remembered and called a hero, a visionary, or whatever other positive term you prefer. It does not, however, retroactively justify his plagiarism, any more that Harry's many excellent qualities and laudable actions justify his. --zgirnius From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 18:17:04 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:17:04 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165198 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Neri" wrote: > Neri: > Where is the canon that Hermione and Draco get better marks in Snape's class than in Slughorn's? And more to the point, where is the canon that they learn better or produce better potions in Snape's lessons than in Slughorn's? Carol: Canon? Snape writes his Potions directions on the board with a flick of his wand; he doesn't assign them from the book. He knows exactly what can go wrong at every point in the experiment. Harry's mistakes in Snape's Potions class almost always result from having missed a step, from not following *Snape's* instructions exactly as they're specified on the board. Draco, Hermione, and the resto of Slughorn's NEWT Potions class (except for Harry and Ron) got O's on their Potions OWLs learning from Snape. They know what they're doing or they could not have received such high marks. Hermione understands Golpalott's Law; Harry doesn't. And yet, suddenly, she's getting lower marks and less praise from Slughorn than Harry, who is falsely credited with having inherited his mother's talent for Potions. Harry himself knows that he's cheating, that he wouldn't get any such results without the HBP's book, which is borne out when he doesn't get the expected results after hiding his book in the RoR and Slughorn, still thinking that he's inherited his mother's talent and refusing to see otherwise, makes excuses for him. I can quote canon if you insist, but it's clear that Harry is using someone else's notes to get results that he wouldn't have achieved had he followed the standard text. He's not earning high marks through his own work or his own understanding of potions. He's earning them through *Snape's* hard work and understanding of the subject. He's even rewarded for handing Slughorn a Bezoar instead of conducting the antidotes experiment as Slughorn himself directed! And Hermione, who does understand Golpalott's Law and has followed directions, is ignored thanks to slughorn's mindless favoritism. If Draco were using the HBP's book to get the results Harry is getting, I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't be recieving praise for resourcefulness by members of this group. He'd be characterized as a typical Slytherin cheat. But since it's Harry--the poor orphaned Chosen One who's always been given a hard time by Snape--it's suddenly okay. Sorry, but Harry should be held to the same standard as everyone else. It's intellectually dishonest to present someone else's findings as your own. Period. > Neri: > On the contrary, it seems to me that it is Harry who is doing better in Slughorn's class, not the rest of the class doing worse. It definitely sounds like Harry was getting much better results, not only in respect to the other students, but also in respect to his own past results in Snape's class. This implies that it was Harry who was suddenly using improved instructions, and not the other students suddenly using degraded instructions. I conclude that Snape wasn't including his own tips in his directions to the students. > Carol: No one is arguing that Harry's instructions, the HBP's are not better than Libatius Borage's. Of course they are. The HBP, Snape, has improved on them through his own efforts. We're arguing that he shouldn't be credited for being brilliant in Potions based on those instructions. The hard work and Potions brilliance he's being credited with are Snape's not his. Harry's improved results are not his own, and they're the result of Snape's instructions! And Hermione *is* having more trouble than she's ever had in Potions, on which she previously got the highest marks in the school (HBP 186). When did Hermione ever have trouble in snape's class? Instead, she offered to help Neville put his botched potion right, and succeeded in doing so. But in HBP, Hermione, who has never had problems following the directions that Snape put on the board (and immediately recognizes all the potions in Slughorn's first class), is suddenly doing less well than Harry, who is (unknowingly) following Snape's instructions: "Hermione, of course, seemed to have progressed furthest. Her potion already resembled the 'smooth black currant-colored liquid described as the ideal halfway stage." Harry, meanwhile, has only finished chopping up his roots and is struggling to cut up the sopophorous beans. So far, so good. Situation normal. (Harry has also noted, ironically as it happens, that Draco Malfoy "would have to rely on nothing but talent to win the Felix Felicis" since he's failed to win preferential treatment by mentioning his grandfather's name. Harry, however, has the advantage of having a mother who was one of Slughorn's favorites and for whose death he feels partly responsible.) But then, as Harry borrows Hermione's silver knife to follow the HBP's instructions, Hermione starts having unexpected trouble: "She nodded impatiently, not taking her eyes off her potion, which was still deep purple, though according to the book, ought to be turning a light shade of lilac by now." Harry meanwhile uses the silver knife to crush the sopophorous bean (which he could not even crush by his own efforts). The bean immediately exudes more juice than he would have thought it could hold (more, undoubtedly, than Hermione's bean crushed by some other method), adds it to the potion, and "*to his surprise* . . . the potion immediately turned exactly the shade of lilac described by the textbook." harry has outdone Hermione without having a clue what he's doing by following the instructions of someone who *does* know what he's doing as the result of his own experiments on improving potions. Hermione, who has done exceptionally well in his class, earning the highest marks in the school, is suddenly outdone by Harry, who doesn't even know why his potion has turned the right color--outdone because the Half-Blood was (and is) a Potions genius, the very same Potions genius who has been teaching Hermione for five years. Harry next follows the Prince's instructions, again the result of Snape's research and experimentation, not Harry's, and adds a clockwise stir after every six counterclockwise stirs while Hermione is following the directions in the book and simply stirring counterclockwise. The directions in the book, Snape's directions, are producing better results than Libatius Borage's, but Harry has no idea why no one else's potion is as pale as his. Slughorn gives Hermione's potion an approving nod, then views Harry's with "incredulous delight." He credits Harry with inheriting his mother's Potions talent, declares him "the clear winner," and hands him the bottle of Felix Felicis. Note, please, that Harry feels *guilt* at this point: "Harry slipped the tiny bottle of golden liquid into his inner pocket, feeling an odd combination of delight at the furious looks of the Slytherins [who know perfectly well that Harry is not a "dab hand" at Potions and have earned O's, not E's, to get into the class] and *guilt* at the disappointed expression on Hermione's" (191). Now is the time for Harry to confess, after class and in private, that he didn't know what he was doing and was following someone else's instructions. Instead, he lets Slughorn think that the Half-Blood Prince's genius is his own. Neri: > Yes, I think Harry wasn't exactly playing fair when achieving his fame based on material he never told his teacher or other students about. But then, academic life at Hogwarts don't strike me as very fair to begin with. It was also not fair that Harry was picked on by his potions teacher for five years, but do we ever hear any objections from any staff member? > Carol: So Snape's sarcasm and Harry's own less than stellar marks in Potions, often caused by his not paying attention (and, again, I can cite canon) are somehow a justification for him to take credit for skill and knowledge he doesn't deserve, including wining the bottle of Felix Felicis that should have gone to Hermione? Sorry, but Snape's unfairness does not justify cheating on Harry's part. And I'll bet you wouldn't think it did if the Half-Blood Prince were anyone other than Snape, any more than you'd think it was right for Draco to achieve unexpectedly improved results using the HBP's book. Snape's unfairness has nothing to do with the matter, nor does Harry bring Snape into it. He blithely accepts the bottle of Felix and Slughorn's praise and high marks all year. But he knows full well who the Potions genius really is, which is why he hides his book and lies to Snape after the Sectumsempra incident, and why his Potions results go back to his usual sub-Hermione performance once he no longer has the use of someone else's notes. Had he known whose book it was, he'd never have used it and Slughorn would never mistakenly have credited him with someone else's genius. Carol, who wishes that Harry's conscience would actually prevent him from doing what he knows is wrong rather than merely making him feel a bit guilty and then forget about it From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Tue Feb 20 18:24:09 2007 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:24:09 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165199 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "colebiancardi" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Neri" wrote: > > On the contrary, it seems to me that it is Harry who is doing better > > in Slughorn's class, not the rest of the class doing worse. It > > definitely sounds like Harry was getting much better results, not only > > in respect to the other students, but also in respect to his own past > > results in Snape's class. This implies that it was Harry who was > > suddenly using improved instructions, and not the other students > > suddenly using degraded instructions. I conclude that Snape wasn't > > including his own tips in his directions to the students. > > > > > colebiancardi: > Snape required an "O" level to get into his NEWT classes. Draco & > Hermione got "O" to continue on to the 6th year. Harry & Ron did not > get "O" and they had not intended to take Potions in the 6th year, > because Snape told his class he didn't take anything less than an "O" > level. However, Slughorn does take "E", so that is why Harry & Ron > got into Sluggy's class. So, Hermoine & Draco did get high marks in > Snape's class. I don't know how they are fairing in Slughorn's class > - I am sure they are still getting high marks, but Sluggy is all about > Harry & his natural talent, which it isn't. > > Since we've read that Snape admonishes Harry for not reading the > instructions on the board, I can only conclude that what Snape writes > on the board are the improved instructions. Harry is getting better > results in the 6th year because a) Snape isn't teaching Potions and b) > he has the HBP's notes. He outshines the rest of the class because > he has Snape's notes, whereas the others don't and are dealing with > the straight text. > > colebiancardi Quick_Silver: Actually this touches on something that I've been wondering about for a while...how good is Harry at potions? See most people seem to be coming down on the side of Harry stealing everything from Snape's book and taking credit for it (which is totally true IMO) but I'm not convinced that that is the whole story. The whole point of the HBP potion's book is to highlight the connection between Snape and Harry...indeed both HBP and OotP contain hints of the similarities between the two. The writings in the HBP book contain potions improvements and spells that seem to DADA in nature. Now we're told by Hermione in HBP that Harry and Snape sound mighty similar when the talk about DADA. Since the other pillar of the Half-Blood Prince seems to be potions, at least in my opinion, for the Harry/Snape duality to continue it seems reasonable to assume that Harry actually does have some natural talent in potions. Even after Harry hides the HBP book and is unable to use it in class Harry states that his work "suffers accordingly"...if JK wanted Harry to be a total fraud at potions why not say that he dropped to the bottom of class (which is where he was at when he entered it)? Quick_Silver (who's just thinking out loud) From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Feb 20 18:34:22 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:34:22 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. Message-ID: <25828807.1171996462301.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165200 Oryomai: > Um...this is not well-known. I have just lost pretty much all respect > for MLK Jr. now. Academic cheating is not something that people > should admire in anyone. I'm not sure who you're talking about > when you say that we make allowances for presidents and famous > celebrities -- but I attempt not to make any exceptions on cheating > (but I am human!). While I don't think Harry should be stoned to > death or anything for his use of the Potions Book, I think that we > cannot look beyond the fact that Harry cheated. Harry even seems > to know this -- when Severus asked for his book, Harry took Ron's > instead. That seems to indicate a guilty conscience to me.... Bart: I have brought this up before, but it bears bringing up again. Traditionally, a hero is not a person without flaws; it is a normally flawed human being who manages to, in spite of these flaws, accomplish great and good things (I say great and good because I just re-read Ollivander's channeling of Louis Farrakhan in Book 1). I see nothing about Martin Luther King's plagarism in college that, in any way, negates the good he did later on. Harry has more thrust upon him than any human being should have. So, he takes shortcuts. He knows what he wants to do, and, if what he needs to do is too difficult, distasteful, or boring, he sticks with what he wants to do. This attitude resulted in his failure to learn Occlumancy (and the death of Sirius), delays in getting a key memory from Sluggy, and, of course, using shortcuts in Snape's old textbook and claiming them as his own innovations. The key is not whether or not he gets away with it. The key is whether or not he can surpass this tendency, and do what it is he needs to do. Bart From muellem at bc.edu Tue Feb 20 18:40:23 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:40:23 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165201 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quick_silver71" wrote: > Actually this touches on something that I've been wondering about for > a while...how good is Harry at potions? > > Even after Harry hides the HBP book and is unable to use it in class > Harry states that his work "suffers accordingly"...if JK wanted Harry > to be a total fraud at potions why not say that he dropped to the > bottom of class (which is where he was at when he entered it)? colebiancardi: well, Harry is not a total loser at Potions. He managed to get an "E" in Snape's class. So, I think the words "suffers accordingly" is two-fold: a) he goes back to pre-HBP days, where he had to work to get his "E" and b) since he hasn't really been doing his own work in Potions - Snape seemed to give a lot of essays in Potions, I don't remember reading that Sluggy gave any homework - he is behind in class. Harry hasn't been reading the Potions book, just HBP's notes and then just using them - an easy way out, so to speak. Harry hasn't been exposed to trial, error, failure and success in the 6th year Potions class. He is just following instructions that Snape wrote. colebiancardi From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 18:36:29 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:36:29 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165202 > Neri: > Where is the canon that Hermione and Draco get better marks in Snape's > class than in Slughorn's? And more to the point, where is the canon > that they learn better or produce better potions in Snape's lessons > than in Slughorn's? zgirnius: Hermione's potions in Snape's classes are frequently described as 'perfect' by Harry, typically in a context where he is noting the unfairness of Snape's not complimenting them or commenting upon them in any way. > OotP, "Professor Umbridge": > "A light silver vapor should now be rising from your potion," called Snape, with ten minutes left to go. > The surface of Hermione's potion, however, was a shimmering mist of silver vapor, and as Snape swept by he looked down his hooked nose at it without comment, which meant that he could find nothing to criticize. >OotP, "The Hogwarts High Inquisitor" > His Strenghtening Solution was not precisely the clear turquoise shade of Hermione's but it was at least blue rather than pink In PoA, in the infamous poisoned toad incident, Hermione was able to cause Neville's disastrous potion to actually *work* within the alloted time for the class. In CoS she was able to brew a working NEWT standard Potion based on a recipe in a book recommended by Snape, so it's not the jump in difficulty that's killing her. In HBP she never once finishes a potion (though she tends to be the closest to Harry, that we hear about). The only explanation I can come up with is instructions that Snape would consider substandard, and thus are not as good as what she is used to. > Neri: > Crediting a source in a written assay is usually a very different > thing from using a manual or supportive material in a hands-on > laboratory lesson. As an instructor in a laboratory course in the > university I was always impressed when seeing a student doing lab work zgirnius: So would I be. But if I complimented them on their creativity (as opposed to diligence) I would be later disappointed to learn the ideas were not their own. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Feb 20 19:16:02 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 19:16:02 -0000 Subject: Voldermort learning the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165203 Jen: > So...what's up for the prophecy in DH? > > I was a little surprised when Voldemort gave up on figuring it out > in HBP. Given Voldemort's obsessive nature and utter belief in the > prophecy, I'm guessing he will seek it out again in the belief > there's something about why Harry thwarts him at every turn. At > least I think that's what JKR is going for, that even though Harry > continues to escape Voldemort by love LV underestimates that power > and therefore will continue to believe there's more to Harry. SSSusan: Right. That *was* weird that, after all his efforts in OotP, he just then gave up on it. We knew that DD figured Voldy would stop going at it the *way* he had in that year, by boring into Harry's thoughts via their mind connection, but why didn't he seem to be working on it in at all HBP? The one thing about Voldy, though.... I mean, you're right that he's obsessive and seemed hell-bent on figuring out the prophecy because he *believes* in it, but... well, Voldy's not always the sharpest tool in the shed, is he? I know he's supposed to be the most powerful dark wizard, capable of amazing feats, but yet he's been pretty STUPID about some things, by his own admission. You know, not remembering about the "old magic;" insisting on spilling all the beans in the graveyard in front of Harry, then failing to finish him off; underestimating the kid when he really ought to realize there's Something About Harry. So for me, that leaves a question: WILL he return to obsessing about the prophecy in DH? Or was his lack of attention to it during Harry's 6th year an indication that he either gave up on that or is too stupid (heh) to figure out another way to go about getting at it? Jen: > Since Voldemort knows Trelawney is the Seer in question you'd think > he would make an *attempt* to get to her (unless he knows something > we don't, i.e., you can't magically get something from a person who > channelled information she doesn't remember). Even if she wasn't > kidnapped out of the Vanishing Cabinent the tower night, it makes > sense to me LV turned his focus to removing Dumbledore first in > order to clear the way to Harry and possibly Trelawney (and who > knows, maybe a Horcrux hidden at Hogwarts?). SSSusan: Okay, then maybe it wasn't stupidity. :) Maybe Voldemort *has* had a plan to get to the prophecy via Trelawney, but he just wanted to get DD out of the way first. That would be a good plan! I'm not sure quite WHY I don't think we're going to see a return to his quest to get his hands on the prophecy, but I just don't "feel" it coming. (Not that that means much that *I'm* not feeling a premonition, heh.) Maybe it's just the way JKR dropped the whole thing for the entire 6th book? Maybe it's that I can't imagine how he wouldn't figure it all out (that it's about Love) if he does hear it. Maybe it's that we have -- JKR has caused us to -- switched our focus towards those horcruxes and wondering so much about how that's all going to play out. But it would certainly be interesting if Voldy has been working on a long-range plan... getting DD out of his way, getting to Trelawney, maybe even retrieving a Horschow hidden at Hogwarts, as you mentioned. [Total Aside: That's one thing I wonder. Do people think that Voldy now has an idea that his Hicchops are being hunted down, or is he still clueless about that? It seems like Harry would have no chance in hell of finding & destroying them all if Voldy *were* aware (and he could just create more if he weren't averse to toying w/ the magic number of 7 soul bits), but I wouldn't put it past JKR to have Voldy having discovered Harry's quest.] Jen: > Another thought--how would knowing the prophecy change his > strategy? I'm guessing Voldemort would nix love as Harry's power > and instead attempt to figure out what magical power Harry could > have that Voldemort doesn't know about. Or, since he says himself > in the graveyard that love was his downfall at GH and in the MOM > again he must have at least an inkling of what drove him out, would > he guess Harry's power is love even if he continues to > underestimate it? SSSusan: See, that's just it. I can't figure out how knowing the full prophecy WOULD change much. ??? So he'd know for certain (if he interprets it how DD & Harry did) that either he's gotta kill the little snot or the little snot's gonna kill him, but since he's ALREADY determined to kill the little snot, it wouldn't exactly mark a change in his strategy. So, yes, it's the "power the Dark Lord knows not" which would surely intrigue Voldy. Would he SERIOUSLY think that power would be something unrelated to Love, unrelated to what "worked" for Harry at GH? I can't imagine it. Then again, I did say above that Voldy's been pretty stupid on occasion. But I don't know.... I guess I'm expecting JKR to bring out in Book 7 the Voldy we've all really wanted to see -- not the comical Evil Overlord who overestimates himself, underestimates his nemesis and talks too much, but the REALLY scary, powerful, evil, murderous, cruel, dangerous Dark Lord who terrorized the entire WW into being afraid to even breathe his name. I just can't imagine her presenting him being stupid *again.* So how can he hear the prophecy and, NOT being stupid, still not figure out it's about Love? Or could he actually figure that out and still be powerless to counter it? Siriusly Snapey Susan, clearly demonstrating that it's been so long since she's posted that she doesn't remember how to organize her thoughts From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 19:25:19 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 19:25:19 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheathing in Potions in HBP WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165205 > Neri: > > These nuances depend a lot on culture, institution, faculty and > > subject. We don't know what the relevant rules in Hogwarts are. But > > Hermione probably knows, and she dislikes the Prince from the > > beginning, and yet AFAIK she never tells Harry that he's breaking > any > > rules, or that he might get a detention or be expelled if he's > caught. > > Yes, I think Harry wasn't exactly playing fair when achieving his > fame > > based on material he never told his teacher or other students > about. > > But then, academic life at Hogwarts don't strike me as very fair to > > begin with. It was also not fair that Harry was picked on by his > > potions teacher for five years, but do we ever hear any objections > > from any staff member? > > Magpie: > No, she doesn't tell him he's breaking rules. But she obviously > thinks he's getting credit for things he doesn't deserve credit for, > which is true. I'm a little surprised that something that Harry > himself always recognizes as dishonest is getting defended by stuff > like "Well, who cares about classes being fair?" or "Why's it > important to learn the subject in school?" It's not fair that Harry > had a mean teacher for 5 years that didn't like him so he's getting > payback through getting credit for being a Potions whiz when he > isn't in return? Since when do those things go together? (And if > that is what he is doing, I expect Snape's debt is paid in full now > and nobody can consider him unfair anymore.) Alla: YAY. Trip to the bathroom seems to be over, so I figured I will finally change the subject :) Hmmm, was Harry cheating or not? IMO I agree with Neri that academic life in Hogwarts does not strike me as fair **at all**. But since I always say that I consider Snape to be a child abuser by our standards and do think that JKR really does have our standards in mind for Potterverse as strive for, I totally say that Harry **was** cheating, no question about it. I think though Magpie, that who cares about that stuff is not exactly a defense, more like an excuse, sort of. Because the way I think about it, I precisely do not care about it not because Harry was not cheating, but because of the way Snape treated him. In RL, sure I would have cared about it, but I do think that Harry was **way** overdue some compensation and no, I do not think that makes Snape debt paid, far from it ;) ( just in literature, hehe) JMO, Alla From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Tue Feb 20 19:47:31 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:47:31 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldermort learning the prophecy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702201147p303add02td29fd140b833474f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165206 Jen: > So...what's up for the prophecy in DH? > > I was a little surprised when Voldemort gave up on figuring it out > in HBP. Given Voldemort's obsessive nature and utter belief in the > prophecy, I'm guessing he will seek it out again in the belief > there's something about why Harry thwarts him at every turn. At > least I think that's what JKR is going for, that even though Harry > continues to escape Voldemort by love LV underestimates that power > and therefore will continue to believe there's more to Harry. SSSusan: Right. That *was* weird that, after all his efforts in OotP, he just then gave up on it. We knew that DD figured Voldy would stop going at it the *way* he had in that year, by boring into Harry's thoughts via their mind connection, but why didn't he seem to be working on it in at all HBP? Jen: > Since Voldemort knows Trelawney is the Seer in question you'd think > he would make an *attempt* to get to her (unless he knows something > we don't, i.e., you can't magically get something from a person who > channelled information she doesn't remember). Even if she wasn't > kidnapped out of the Vanishing Cabinent the tower night, it makes > sense to me LV turned his focus to removing Dumbledore first in > order to clear the way to Harry and possibly Trelawney (and who > knows, maybe a Horcrux hidden at Hogwarts?). SSSusan: Okay, then maybe it wasn't stupidity. :) Maybe Voldemort *has* had a plan to get to the prophecy via Trelawney, but he just wanted to get DD out of the way first. That would be a good plan! I'm not sure quite WHY I don't think we're going to see a return to his quest to get his hands on the prophecy, but I just don't "feel" it coming. (Not that that means much that *I'm* not feeling a premonition, heh.) Maybe it's just the way JKR dropped the whole thing for the entire 6th book? Maybe it's that I can't imagine how he wouldn't figure it all out (that it's about Love) if he does hear it. Maybe it's that we have -- JKR has caused us to -- switched our focus towards those horcruxes and wondering so much about how that's all going to play out. But it would certainly be interesting if Voldy has been working on a long-range plan... getting DD out of his way, getting to Trelawney, maybe even retrieving a Horschow hidden at Hogwarts, as you mentioned. ================================== Jeremiah: I think we're forgetting that we see the story through Harry. Harry knows about the prophesy and he was told, be DD that they are the only two who know the "entire" prophecy. This, I am assuming, means that everyone else is assuming that the prophecy was destroyed and will never be heard again. the Death Eaters are under the assumption that they have "failed" to get the prophecy for LV and the plan would be concidered a bust. However, one can assume that Snape informed LV (before his "conversion" -I'll let that pro/con argument wait for another thread but not here in this one) about the Seer (Trelawney) who made the prophecy. This would be a very good reason for DD, in OotP, insisting that she stay on as a resident in the castle and for DD's insistance that she stay as a professor and share the teaching duties with Firenz. She cannot leave the protection of Hogwarts and DD (but now that he's gone this might change her protection). Yes, going after her would be a fantastic idea but, as we know from PoA, she doesn't recall these trance-like-states. I believe she is totally unaware of her "gift" and I think it would be very difficult for her to be tortured to tell LV or his Death Eaters about it. Since she has no memory I would assume it cannot be extracted, since eh has not "thoughts" about it I would also think you cannot look into her head and see anything about it. If she is tortured she will be killed. Sadly, IMO, that is what would happen. LV's attempts to find out about the prophecy are futile and that is his part of his quest for power, which is his hubris. SSSusan, I see what you mean by dropping the prohecy plot-line in HBP, however, I think JKR was furthering Trelawney (and, in effect, the truth about the prophecy) by focusing on 2 encounters between Harry and Trelawney. (Both involving Sherry and babbling) but her accuracy is pretty good. She detects Harry with her cards and sees the "Lighting Struck Tower." Even though she's not very good at being precise, she'd got something going on and I think JKR was sacrificing the prophecy sub-plot and supplanting it with Trelawney's ability to "detect" (that's the only way I can describe it because she's not very precise) the future. What I mean about furthering the prophecy by furtherin Trelawney's character is this: DD told Harry that Harry believes in the prophecy too much. However, Trelawney claims she repeatedly told DD about the readings (with the Lightning Struck Tower and his impending doom) and he didn't put any faith in them but he still ended up pon the top of a tower and died. Putting faith in or lacking faith in a prophecy doesn't seem to change it, IMO. But, with Harry's prophecy we do not have a clear outcome, just that "one cannot live while the other survives" and that kind of thing but I do think that Trelawney's Prophecy should not be ignored to any extent by Harry or the others. it's decision-time for Harry. Does he find Trelawney to be trustworthy and does he recognize her abilities? (Or, does she even have any direct imput to the plot anymore nad we never see her again?) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 20:07:39 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 20:07:39 -0000 Subject: Harry and Potions (Was: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165208 Quick_Silver wrote: > Actually this touches on something that I've been wondering about for a while...how good is Harry at potions? > > See most people seem to be coming down on the side of Harry stealing everything from Snape's book and taking credit for it (which is totally true IMO) but I'm not convinced that that is the whole story. The whole point of the HBP potion's book is to highlight the connection between Snape and Harry...indeed both HBP and OotP contain hints of the similarities between the two. The writings in the HBP book contain potions improvements and spells that seem to DADA in nature. Now we're told by Hermione in HBP that Harry and Snape sound mighty similar when the talk about DADA. Since the other pillar of the Half-Blood Prince seems to be potions, at least in my opinion, for the Harry/Snape duality to continue it seems reasonable to assume that Harry actually does have some natural talent in potions. > > Even after Harry hides the HBP book and is unable to use it in class Harry states that his work "suffers accordingly"...if JK wanted Harry to be a total fraud at potions why not say that he dropped to the bottom of class (which is where he was at when he entered it)? Carol responds: Thanks for taking this thread in a new direction. I'll just say that Harry was never *bad* in Potions: he managed to earn an E on the OWL despite being frequently sidetracked and often skipping steps because he's not paying attention in Snape's Potions classes. I don't think that Harry could ever have been a Potions genius like Teen!Severus--he's not inherently logical or scientifically minded or patient enough to spend hours in a Potions lab after hours finding out what happens when you add a peppermint leaf to a particular potion--but he could probably have earned an O if he'd paid attention in Snape's classes and followed directions carefully--as Ernie Macmillan and the various Ravenclaws and Slytherins did. But he hated Snape and was always distracted in his Potions classes, and his failures no doubt caused him to lose whatever natural interest he might have had in the subject, whereas his unexpected--and unearned--success in Slughorn's class suddenly stimulates his interest. I'm not sure that he actually learned anything about Potions from the HBP (in contrast to learning some useful or amusing spells and one dangerous curse)--certainly, he still doesn't understand the theory behind Potions and isn't likely to start inventing potions improvements of his own--but he certainly gained an appreciation for Bezoars and possibly a respect for the subject itself that he never had before. I don't think, however, that the new interest will last now that he knows who the Half-Blood Prince is, nor do I think he'll ever appreciate the delicious irony that he was learning more in both Potions and DADA from the Half-Blood Prince (Snape) than he ever did from Snape! What's important, IMO, is his appreciation during HBP of the Prince's genius, his feeling that this unknown boy was his friend and helper (while, at the same time, he was taking credit for his "friend's" efforts!). Like the Pensieve memory, the HBP's Potions book took him a step closer to understanding and empathizing with the teenage Snape, with whom, as you say, he has much in common, only to be undermined by unanticipated events--Sirius Black's death, for which Harry wrongly blamed Snape, and the eavesdropping and murder of Dumbledore, for which he has much more reason to blame Snape but about which he has yet to learn the full truth, as do we. To return to Harry and Potions, at the end of the year, without the HBP, he's exactly where he would have been all year long if he'd been following Libatius Borage's instructions rather than Teen!Severus's: behind most of the rest of the class, the O students and Hermione in particular, but perhaps ahead of Ron, his lone fellow E student. As you say, when Harry no longer has the Prince's instructions to follow, his performance "suffer[s] accordingly, but it can't be too abysmal or Slughorn wouldn't blame it on being lovesick (HBP Am. ed. 537). Harry is sure that Snape is still determined to confiscate his book, so he keeps it hidden, but interestingly, Snape has not told Slughorn where Harry's "brilliance" comes from, so Sluggy still thinks that Harry is a Potions genius. Maybe the truth will out in DH?) Another small point: Teen!Severus's spells, with the exception of Muffliato, which appears to be a charm, and the Dark curse Sectumsempra, are not so much DADA spells (Harry's speciality) as hexes (toenail hex, for example). Levicorpus I would also call a charm since it alters the properties of an object without Transfiguring (changing the nature of) the object. Ironically (sorry to overuse the word, but irony is everywhere in HBP), learning Teen!Severus's spells makes him start behaving like James, hexing everyone in sight, trying out Levicorpus on Ron (inadvertently, to be sure), using Langlock, the tongue-locking hex, on the helpless Filch, and considering testing Sectumsempra on McLaggen. I do think, however, that there's a connection between an affinity for the Dark Arts and an affinity for its opposite, Defense Against the Dark Arts. Snape, clearly, is skilled at both, the only expert we know of outside St. Mungo's at healing really Dark curses and as good at deflecting curses as at casting them (both nonverbally). So, yes, there's a connection here: Harry's favorite subject (at least in previous years), the one he taught other students in the DA, is also Snape's favorite class, as we see from his detailed DADA OWL and his (apparent) annual applications to teach DADA. Snape clearly loves Potions as well as DADA and is equally gifted in it, but it's a more elite, poetic passion, IMO, shared only by a gifted few students. (Imagine a Draco not sidetracked by a mission for the Dark Lord in a NEWT Potions class taught by a Snape not sidetracked by Harry's and Ron's inattentiveness. Heaven for both of them? But Voldemort ruined that pleasant prospect, and Snape is teaching DADA, for which DE!Draco has nothing but contempt.) Snape is more than willing to take anyone who has scraped an OWL into his DADA class, and is even evidently giving Crabbe and Goyle remedial lessons in it, something he would never do for Potions. One is a self-defense class, necessary for all students at a time when the WW is threatened by Voldemort; the other is an intellectual passion to be shared with fellow enthusiasts and in which dunderheads are not to be tolerated. Anyway, potions played a larger than usual role in HBP (Snape's book, in many ways) and as Magpie, IIRC, has pointed out, the Slytherin book, associated with water and liquids of all varieties, from poisoned mead and the glowing green potion in the cave (a poisoned memory, IMO) to Felix Felicis. I'm not sure whether potions have played their part and will be largely forgotten in Book 7, or whether Harry's new interest in Potions/potions will somehow be sustained in spite of Snape's being the HBP and in spite of Harry's being (probably) no longer at Hogwarts. The Draught of Living Death may well play a role that has been foreshadowed in HBP but has not yet materialized, but I don't think we're going to see any sign of Harry the (supposed) Potions natural in DH. Carol, wondering what might motivate Harry to retrieve the HBP's Potions book now that he knows whose it is, along with the Invisibility Cloak that he left on the Astronomy Tower From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 20:37:57 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 20:37:57 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165209 > colebiancardi: > Snape required an "O" level to get into his NEWT classes. Draco & > Hermione got "O" to continue on to the 6th year. Harry & Ron did not > get "O" and they had not intended to take Potions in the 6th year, > because Snape told his class he didn't take anything less than an "O" > level. However, Slughorn does take "E", so that is why Harry & Ron > got into Sluggy's class. Neri: It is canon that Hermione got an O in the potions OWL. However, it is *not* canon that Draco or anything else in the class got an O. It is only one possible interpretation of canon, one that is slightly problematic (for example, for somebody whose supposed to be an O student Draco is *never* shown, in six books, to do something particularly well in potions class). An equally likely interpretation is that most of the other students in Slughorn's class also got in because the requirements were lowered to E. But in any case we can't use the OWL marks for comparison because the students didn't take independent tests after Slughorn's year and we don't know what marks they would have got if they did. So I'm only basing my estimation on what we actually see from the students in the class. > colebiancardi: > So, Hermoine & Draco did get high marks in > Snape's class. I don't know how they are fairing in Slughorn's class > - I am sure they are still getting high marks, but Sluggy is all about > Harry & his natural talent, which it isn't. > Neri: To be exact, Draco appears as mediocre as he appeared in Snape's class and Hermione is as brilliant as she was in Snape's class. The only difference we see is in Harry, which is what I was saying: Harry was suddenly working with improved instructions, not the rest of the class suddenly working on bad instructions. > Magpie: > When do you remember Hermione so frazzled in Snape's class? Neri: Hermione is doing very well in Slughorn's class, much better than the rest of the class (which, BTW, would be strange of they are all O students too). She is only outshined by Harry and the Prince's instructions. > colebiancardi: > Since we've read that Snape admonishes Harry for not reading the > instructions on the board, I can only conclude that what Snape writes > on the board are the improved instructions. Neri: I don't see how you conclude the second part from the first. > colebiancardi: > Harry is getting better > results in the 6th year because a) Snape isn't teaching Potions and b) > he has the HBP's notes. He outshines the rest of the class because > he has Snape's notes, whereas the others don't and are dealing with > the straight text. > Neri: This was exactly my point. Harry is doing better because he has Snape's notes. If Snape was always including his special tips in his instructions to his class then Harry's situation, in absolute terms, hadn't changed at all from Snape's to Slughorn's class. He's still working by Snape's improved instructions, same as always, and is only looking better relative to the other students who suddenly don't have them and are doing much worse than they used to. But it is very obvious that Harry *is* suddenly achieving much better results, in absolute terms and not only in comparison with the other students. And you can't blame it all on Snape's absence, tempting as it is. Snape was also absent from the OWL test and Harry only got an E. So the way you present it, Harry is an E student and he's working by Snape's instructions same as he did in the previous five years, and yet he consistently outshines a whole bunch of O students. > Magpie: > I thought the exact opposite was obvious. Suddenly Hermione is > struggling and Harry is breezing through, even though Hermione still > understands the material better than Harry does. Neri: Hermione isn't "struggling". She's doing very well just like she always has. > Magpie: > Yes, and in this case the notes and work aren't the issue. The issue > is Harry working at an unfair advantage to the rest of the class, > which he himself never denies he is doing, and allowing the teacher > to believe that his better results are due to his own instinctive > changes in the Potions. Neri: The world is full of unfair advantages. Some students are richer, some students have a Wizarding family, and some students have the teacher on their side. As I've wrote, Harry did have an unfair advantage. The issue I was answering Carol about was whether Harry was breaking any copywriting laws or school rules. It appears that he wasn't. > Magpie: > No, she doesn't tell him he's breaking rules. But she obviously > thinks he's getting credit for things he doesn't deserve credit for, > which is true. I'm a little surprised that something that Harry > himself always recognizes as dishonest is getting defended by stuff > like "Well, who cares about classes being fair?" Neri: Well, the way you present it, it is more of Slughorn's fault, really. He's teaching using bad instructions, and Harry was just lucky to put his hands on the usual instructions. It's like you suddenly get a really lousy physics teacher in high school, so nobody actually learns much, except you do because you're lucky to have a physicist for a father and he explains everything to you, so you get to be the first in your class. Unfair? Yes, but that's life. Neri From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Feb 20 20:39:33 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 20:39:33 -0000 Subject: Voldermort learning the prophecy? In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702201147p303add02td29fd140b833474f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165210 SSSusan earlier: > I'm not sure quite WHY I don't think we're going to see a return to > his quest to get his hands on the prophecy, but I just don't "feel" > it coming. (Not that that means much that *I'm* not feeling a > premonition, heh.) Maybe it's just the way JKR dropped the whole > thing for the entire 6th book? Maybe it's that I can't imagine how > he wouldn't figure it all out (that it's about Love) if he does hear > it. Maybe it's that we have -- JKR has caused us to -- switched our > focus towards those horcruxes and wondering so much about how that's > all going to play out. > > But it would certainly be interesting if Voldy has been working on a > long-range plan... getting DD out of his way, getting to Trelawney, > maybe even retrieving a Horschow hidden at Hogwarts, as you > mentioned. > Jeremiah responded: > This, I am assuming, means that everyone else is assuming that the > prophecy was destroyed and will never be heard again. the Death > Eaters are under the assumption that they have "failed" to get the > prophecy for LV and the plan would be concidered a bust. > > However, one can assume that Snape informed LV (before > his "conversion" ... about the Seer (Trelawney) who made the > prophecy. This would be a very good reason for DD, in OotP, > insisting that she stay on as a resident in the castle and for DD's > insistance that she stay as a professor and share the teaching > duties with Firenz. She cannot leave the protection of Hogwarts and > DD (but now that he's gone this might change her protection). SSSusan: I'm with you so far, yes. The DEs very well might have assumed it was a big "Whoops, we mucked that up and it's all over now!" And I agree that DD wanted Trelawney to stay in large part for her own protection. Jeremiah: > Yes, going after her would be a fantastic idea but, as we know from > PoA, she doesn't recall these trance-like-states. I believe she is > totally unaware of her "gift" and I think it would be very > difficult for her to be tortured to tell LV or his Death Eaters > about it. Since she has no memory I would assume it cannot be > extracted, since eh has not "thoughts" about it I would also > think you cannot look into her head and see anything about it. If > she is tortured she will be killed. Sadly, IMO, that is what would > happen. LV's attempts to find out about the prophecy are futile and > that is his part of his quest for power, which is his hubris. SSSusan: Now *this* is the part that gets me excited about the discussion, Jeremiah! Here's why. You're correct that Trelawney has no real conscious recollection of her trance-like states. However, we know that they're *in* there, right? It's true that torturing her and saying, "Tell me or I'll Crucio you!" wouldn't do any good, because she isn't consciously holding back information. OTOH, she *does* have a recollection of *part* of the night that she delivered The Prophecy (the main one, I mean, at the Hog's Head). What she does remember is Snape being in the hallway and being removed from the premises. "So what?" one might ask. Well, one of the things we learned about how the pensieve works is that a memory placed in the pensieve is "more complete" than what is conscious to the person from whom it came. Remember how Harry was able to "walk around" inside Snape's memory? Could follow James & Lupin & Sirius & Peter and overhear the things they said that Snape did *not* actually hear? I've long believed that, because Harry remembers tiny, sensory bits of the night of the GH attack -- the flash of green light, his mother's scream -- that that means there *is* a memory of that night which could be extracted and "walked around in." I've always thought this might be the way Harry finally discovers details about what happened that night. Could the same be true for Trelawney? Since she remembers *something* about the night she delivered The Prophecy -- even if it's just the interruption part -- could someone extract that memory, place it in a pensieve, and "walk around in it," to discover more about the scene, even hear the entire prophecy? If that's true, and if Voldy knows it's true, then he might go after Trelawney and not torture her into telling what she knows (not much) but find a way to extract the memory in order to find out what she "knows" without consciously knowing it. Jeremiah: > SSSusan, I see what you mean by dropping the prohecy plot-line in > HBP, however, I think JKR was furthering Trelawney (and, in effect, > the truth about the prophecy) by focusing on 2 encounters between > Harry and Trelawney. (Both involving Sherry and babbling) but her > accuracy is pretty good. She detects Harry with her cards and sees > the "Lighting Struck Tower." Even though she's not very good at > being precise, she'd got something going on and I think JKR was > sacrificing the prophecy sub-plot and supplanting it with > Trelawney's ability to "detect" (that's the only way I can describe > it because she's not very precise) the future. > ...Trelawney claims she repeatedly told DD about the readings (with > the Lightning Struck Tower and his impending doom) and he didn't > put any faith in them but he still ended up pon the top of a tower > and died. ...I do think that Trelawney's Prophecy should not be > ignored to any extent by Harry or the others. it's decision-time > for Harry. Does he find Trelawney to be trustworthy and does he > recognize her abilities? SSSusan: Very interesting! It does seem that JKR went to pains to show us how Trelawney was sort of predicting accurately. I like your word "detect" rather than actually "predicting;" it fits. So the question, as you're suggesting, is: Why did JKR do that *after* the prophecy plot line seemed to have been dropped? Maybe it *was* to keep us thinking about Trelawney and how she shouldn't be ignored. Interesting! :) Siriusly Snapey Susan From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 20 21:31:05 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:31:05 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheathing in Potions in HBP WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165212 > > Magpie: > > No, she doesn't tell him he's breaking rules. But she obviously > > thinks he's getting credit for things he doesn't deserve credit > for, > > which is true. I'm a little surprised that something that Harry > > himself always recognizes as dishonest is getting defended by stuff > > like "Well, who cares about classes being fair?" or "Why's it > > important to learn the subject in school?" It's not fair that Harry > > had a mean teacher for 5 years that didn't like him so he's getting > > payback through getting credit for being a Potions whiz when he > > isn't in return? Since when do those things go together? (And if > > that is what he is doing, I expect Snape's debt is paid in full now > > and nobody can consider him unfair anymore.) > > > Alla: > > YAY. Trip to the bathroom seems to be over, so I figured I will > finally change the subject :) > > Hmmm, was Harry cheating or not? IMO I agree with Neri that academic > life in Hogwarts does not strike me as fair **at all**. > > But since I always say that I consider Snape to be a child abuser by > our standards and do think that JKR really does have our standards in > mind for Potterverse as strive for, I totally say that Harry **was** > cheating, no question about it. > > I think though Magpie, that who cares about that stuff is not exactly > a defense, more like an excuse, sort of. Magpie: Yes, I think it depends on what one is arguing for, exactly. I mean, on one level, JKR has not come up with a very good example of "cheating." Harry's following a recipe for Potions, Hermione's following a recipe for Potions--what's the difference? Yet JKR does create a situation where it clearly is dishonest by having Harry specifically take credit for improvements as if he came up with them by understanding the underlying laws, which it is stressed he doesn't. Then there's the question of how *bad* it is, which is where the "who cares" stuff comes in. Now, I don't think it's that bad--if I had the HBP's book I can't say I wouldn't necessarily have done the same thing. Where I would argue against "who cares" is not to say that Harry has done a horrible, horrible thing, but that Harry has done *nothing* because of totally random reasons--he's an orphan, Snape was a jerk, he wouldn't have used the book if it was Snape's. Or more disturbingly, writing out the idea entirely from different angles--Harry's not really at an advantage, it's about Snape's instructions being inferior, Harry's experimenting like s scientist. That's just not what's going on. Harry himself owns the fact that he's being dishonest, and we can too. Alla: > > Because the way I think about it, I precisely do not care about it > not because Harry was not cheating, but because of the way Snape > treated him. > > In RL, sure I would have cared about it, but I do think that Harry > was **way** overdue some compensation and no, I do not think that > makes Snape debt paid, far from it ;) ( just in literature, hehe) Magpie: Really, the "real" reason this is bad for Harry has nothing to do with his karma. The problem isn't that Snape stews over the idea of Harry being seen as a Potions genius, though we're free to find that funny and as payback for Snape's own attempts to keep Harry down. The real issue--and this is going to sound totally Hermione and goody-two shoes, but every kid knows this is What's Wrong With Cheating by the time they're five--is that Harry is not taking the class honestly. Like Hermione says the first time she refuses to write his essay for him "How will you learn?" That's the point of being graded fairly in Potions. Harry's also causing trouble for himself with other kids in the class--the exact kind of trouble he might once have not wanted to be a part of himself. Neri: It is canon that Hermione got an O in the potions OWL. However, it is *not* canon that Draco or anything else in the class got an O. It is only one possible interpretation of canon, one that is slightly problematic (for example, for somebody whose supposed to be an O student Draco is *never* shown, in six books, to do something particularly well in potions class). An equally likely interpretation is that most of the other students in Slughorn's class also got in because the requirements were lowered to E. But in any case we can't use the OWL marks for comparison because the students didn't take independent tests after Slughorn's year and we don't know what marks they would have got if they did. So I'm only basing my estimation on what we actually see from the students in the class. Magpie: It's the most straightforward interpretation. Harry and Ron need books because they are the "E" students. The "O" students had books because they knew they could take the class with Snape. Draco is shown to do fine in Potions throughout canon. Snape compliments his stewing the first day, and he makes fun of people who got a D (as Harry did) on the practice OWLS in fifth year. There's nothing surprising about Draco, Snape's favorite student, who has never been shown to have any trouble in Potions, getting an "O." When he's lumped in with Hermione and all the others while Ron and Harry are singled out with their E's, I think it takes more twisting to argue him out of a simple O than to imagine him having one. i don't think we need special proof that he's good enough to get an O. Neri: To be exact, Draco appears as mediocre as he appeared in Snape's class and Hermione is as brilliant as she was in Snape's class. The only difference we see is in Harry, which is what I was saying: Harry was suddenly working with improved instructions, not the rest of the class suddenly working on bad instructions. Magpie: As I said above, Draco is not shown to be "mediocre" in Snape's class--it's not like we get a rundown of every Potion in every class. This particular class isn't for the mediocre--and he seems to do fine in it as well. On par with the other students not Harry. > Magpie: > When do you remember Hermione so frazzled in Snape's class? Neri: This was exactly my point. Harry is doing better because he has Snape's notes. If Snape was always including his special tips in his instructions to his class then Harry's situation, in absolute terms, hadn't changed at all from Snape's to Slughorn's class. Magpie: Right. What has changed is first that other students no longer have access to Snape's instructions, and that Harry is paying attention to the instructions more now. In the past when Harry has gotten a Potion wrong Snape has pointed out that he did not follow instructions on the board. > Magpie: > I thought the exact opposite was obvious. Suddenly Hermione is > struggling and Harry is breezing through, even though Hermione still > understands the material better than Harry does. Neri: Hermione isn't "struggling". She's doing very well just like she always has. Magpie: Not just as she always has. Now she struggles to get results that show her relatively better grasp of the subject than her neighbor. She's never had trouble being the best in brewing a Potion from instructions, and now she is. She's better than Harry at Potions, but now can't show it. > Magpie: > No, she doesn't tell him he's breaking rules. But she obviously > thinks he's getting credit for things he doesn't deserve credit for, > which is true. I'm a little surprised that something that Harry > himself always recognizes as dishonest is getting defended by stuff > like "Well, who cares about classes being fair?" Neri: Well, the way you present it, it is more of Slughorn's fault, really. He's teaching using bad instructions, and Harry was just lucky to put his hands on the usual instructions. It's like you suddenly get a really lousy physics teacher in high school, so nobody actually learns much, except you do because you're lucky to have a physicist for a father and he explains everything to you, so you get to be the first in your class. Unfair? Yes, but that's life. Magpie: It's Slughorn's fault what? That the class gets bad instructions? Yes, it is. That he favors Harry and sees what he wants to see? yes. That Harry lies about knowing more about Potions than he does? No. Harry doesn't have a physicist father explaining things to him--the Prince isn't *explaining* things to Harry, which is why Harry isn't actually any better at Potions than he was before. He's just getting better results making his Potions than the rest of the class with his corrected instructions. And as I said to Alla, there's nothing wrong with using good instructions. If Harry wants to keep those instructions to himself to make sure he's always best in the class that's his choice. And yes, life is unfair. But the issue in the thread isn't, for me, that Harry can't ever have an unfair advantage. He's had advantages before. The point is that Harry is taking credit for things he is not--being naturally good at Potions, having a great grasp of Potions theory, getting better marks because he's pulling stuff out of his own head. The rest of the class will live, and Harry hasn't really earned himself a skill. It's fine--but call it what it is. It's not Harry getting his dad to help him with his homework and explain things to him, or Harry showing that he really is better than the other students at Potions or Harry really being what he's presenting himself as to Slughorn. Harry is under no illusions about that. Snape knows Harry isn't the naturally brilliant student Slughorn says he is and so does Harry. -m From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Feb 20 21:47:01 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:47:01 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165214 colebiancardi Wrote: > Snape required an "O" level to get into > his NEWT classes. Draco & Hermione got > "O" to continue on to the 6th year. > Harry & Ron did not get "O" Are you suggesting that everyone in Slughorn's class got a O in potions except Harry and Ron? If so that means O is a more common grade than E and the wizard world is suffering a serious case of grade inflation. But we don't know what grade Draco got, however he doesn't exactly seem like a world beater to me zgirnius: > Plagiarism is still plagiarism even > when no money is made from it. If I obtain a skill from reading a book I have not indulged in plagiarism every time I exercise that skill. If I read a book on chess and it improves my game I am not plagiarizing every time I play. > He [Snape] is said to write potions > instruction on the board - I believe > this is because he taught the > improved methids. That is a good point and I think it could very well be true. Whatever problems I have with Snape I can't deny he is an excellent potions teacher, I'm just not sure he's an excellent human being. > This also explains why Hermione went from > making perfect potions every time, to > having some difficulty, while Harry > experienced the opposite in HBP. The difficulty Hermione was having in potions was entirely of her own doing. Harry offered to share the HBP book with her but she refused and insisted on doing things the boring old textbook way. This unexpected streak of intellectual pig-headedness does not speak well for her success in the coming years. I hope she gets over it. Eggplant From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Tue Feb 20 21:30:15 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 16:30:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Harry cheathing in Potions in HBP WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001c01c75536$5075c980$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165216 --Alla Wrote-- >>>Hmmm, was Harry cheating or not? IMO I agree with Neri that academic life in Hogwarts does not strike me as fair **at all**. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- I don't think Harry was cheating at all. They are all in classes to learn and were all given required textbooks for the class. Harry's copy is used and contains notes from a previous student. He has the benefit of the extra notes made by someone who went before him and he's found that the notes are very helpful. None of them are working from their own set of instructions. They are all following a set of instructions written by someone else. Harry's book just has the added benefit of a third person's input. Some colleges reccomend buying used books for just this reason. I'm re-reading THBP at the moment and I must say that I normally love Hermione, but she gets on my nerves in this book, something fierce. If she had been issued a copy of a potions textbook written by The Half Blood Prince, that would be fine or if she found a copy in the school library. But since Harry is able to learn from the notations in the book, she has a problem with him outperforming her at something. I say, if it helps him to learn and find excitement in a subject that he normally hates, more power to him. He needs to learn potions if he wants to become an Auror and the Prince's notes are helping him catch up. It sort of like an anonymous potions tutor. It's not like he's written it all down into his own textbook which he is trying to sell. He's just learning. My only hope is that Harry retains what he learns from the HBP. I'm sure that if the notes being in the book was a problem, the book would've been removed from the schools inventory and destroyed. Just as with any other school or librarys, when a used book is returned it is customarily appraised and if it is damaged or found to be rendered insufficient, it is removed and the person who had borrowed it is charged for replacing it. If anything, I think that Hogwarts should be ashamed of themselves for using such an outdated and inferior textbook. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 22:06:14 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:06:14 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheathing in Potions in HBP WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165217 > Magpie: > Then there's the question of how *bad* it is, which is where > the "who cares" stuff comes in. Now, I don't think it's that bad-- if > I had the HBP's book I can't say I wouldn't necessarily have done > the same thing. Alla: I would not, but I am guessing for very different reasons from you. Magpie: Where I would argue against "who cares" is not to > say that Harry has done a horrible, horrible thing, but that Harry > has done *nothing* because of totally random reasons--he's an > orphan, Snape was a jerk, he wouldn't have used the book if it was > Snape's. Or more disturbingly, writing out the idea entirely from > different angles--Harry's not really at an advantage, it's about > Snape's instructions being inferior, Harry's experimenting like s > scientist. That's just not what's going on. Harry himself owns the > fact that he's being dishonest, and we can too. Alla: Sure :) > Alla: > > > > Because the way I think about it, I precisely do not care about it > > not because Harry was not cheating, but because of the way Snape > > treated him. > > > > In RL, sure I would have cared about it, but I do think that Harry > > was **way** overdue some compensation and no, I do not think that > > makes Snape debt paid, far from it ;) ( just in literature, hehe) > > Magpie: > Really, the "real" reason this is bad for Harry has nothing to do > with his karma. The problem isn't that Snape stews over the idea of > Harry being seen as a Potions genius, though we're free to find that > funny and as payback for Snape's own attempts to keep Harry down. > > The real issue--and this is going to sound totally Hermione and > goody-two shoes, but every kid knows this is What's Wrong With > Cheating by the time they're five--is that Harry is not taking the > class honestly. Like Hermione says the first time she refuses to > write his essay for him "How will you learn?" That's the point of > being graded fairly in Potions. Harry's also causing trouble for > himself with other kids in the class--the exact kind of trouble he > might once have not wanted to be a part of himself. > Alla: On that I disagree. I am thinking that Slughorn's play over Snape's line ( point for your cheek) makes us think that karma is involved here and heavily. Does not make what Harry does a good thing, sure, but does not make me over concerned about it either. As Neri said, life is not fair. Draco had a teacher on his side for five years, this year it is Harry's turn to have something on his side. It is not fair, no, I am not arguing that, but I am also disagreeing that Harry will not learn anything. He after all did those potions even with Prince instructions, something may stay in his head. I am also laughing over every kid knows what is wrong with cheating. Trust me cultural differences on that are big, but I will offlist you, since it is OT, I guess. From muellem at bc.edu Tue Feb 20 22:01:50 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:01:50 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165218 >> colebiancardi Wrote: >> > > Snape required an "O" level to get into > > his NEWT classes. Draco & Hermione got > > "O" to continue on to the 6th year. > > Harry & Ron did not get "O" > > Eggplant: > > Are you suggesting that everyone in Slughorn's class got a O in > potions except Harry and Ron? If so that means O is a more common > grade than E and the wizard world is suffering a serious case of grade > inflation. But we don't know what grade Draco got, however he doesn't > exactly seem like a world beater to me colebiancardi: hmmmm...I didn't mean for this to sound so confusing. What I meant is that the few 6th years that were in Slughorn's class - Draco, another Slytherian, some Ravenclaws, Ernie, and Hermoine - all got "O"'s on their Potions OWLS in order to progress into Snape's 6th year Potions class. Ron & Harry got "E", one step down from an "O". Now, back when Snape was originally going to teach the 6th years, he was the one that demanded the high marks of an "O", not Slughorn. However, once Slughorn took the position as Potions Professor, Slughorn allowed those who got "E"'s on their OWLS to take his class. So, yes, in my opinion, everyone who was sitting in Slughorn's 6th year Potions classroom got "O"'s with the exception of Ron & Harry. We know they got "E"'s. Only Ron & Harry needed loaner books, as the other students already knew they were taking Potions and bought their books prior to the school year, which means they got "O"'s on their Potions OWLS. colebiancardi(hoping she made sense) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 22:07:50 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:07:50 -0000 Subject: Voldemort learning the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165219 Re: Voldermort learning the prophecy? Jen wrote: > > So...what's up for the prophecy in DH? > > > > I was a little surprised when Voldemort gave up on figuring it out in HBP. Given Voldemort's obsessive nature and utter belief in the prophecy, I'm guessing he will seek it out again in the belief there's something about why Harry thwarts him at every turn. At least I think that's what JKR is going for, that even though Harry continues to escape Voldemort by love LV underestimates that power and therefore will continue to believe there's more to Harry. > > Since Voldemort knows Trelawney is the Seer in question you'd think he would make an *attempt* to get to her . Even if she wasn't kidnapped out of the Vanishing Cabinent the tower night, it makes sense to me LV turned his focus to removing Dumbledore first in order to clear the way to Harry and possibly Trelawney (and who knows, maybe a Horcrux hidden at Hogwarts?). Carol responds: I agree that we haven't seen the last of Trelawney (who, IMO, has one more Prophecy to deliver: these things usually come in threes). but I don't see how she could have been kidnapped through the Vanishing Cabinet. That plan was all about getting DEs into Hogwarts so that Draco could be forced to kill Dumbledore (or die trying). Trelawney just happened to get in Draco's way (and was prevented from telling her story to Dumbledore by Harry's reaction to the eavesdropping revelation). I see a plot to kidnap Trelawney, who's no doubt still holed up in her attic room (her not being mentioned as attending DD's funeral doesn't mean she wasn't there) as a reason for Voldemort to infiltrate Hogwarts in DH, along with retrieving any Horcruxes that might be hidden there or holding any staff or students who happen to be there hostage. A certain rat Animagus we all know and hate still knows all the passages into Hogwarts, including one that's blocked to humans but not to rats and probably is not being watched. > > SSSusan: > Okay, then maybe it wasn't stupidity. :) Maybe Voldemort *has* had a plan to get to the prophecy via Trelawney, but he just wanted to get DD out of the way first. That would be a good plan! > > I'm not sure quite WHY I don't think we're going to see a return to his quest to get his hands on the prophecy, but I just don't "feel" it coming. (Not that that means much that *I'm* not feeling a premonition, heh.) Maybe it's just the way JKR dropped the whole thing for the entire 6th book? Maybe it's that I can't imagine how he wouldn't figure it all out (that it's about Love) if he does hear it. Maybe it's that we have -- JKR has caused us to -- switched our focus towards those horcruxes and wondering so much about how that's all going to play out. > > But it would certainly be interesting if Voldy has been working on a long-range plan... getting DD out of his way, getting to Trelawney, maybe even retrieving a Horschow hidden at Hogwarts, as you mentioned. > > Carol responds: I agree that the Prophecy was largely dropped in HBP except for the revelation that Snape was the eavesdropper and DD's near-dismissal of the whole thing, but I think it's more or less on hold. Certainly, Snape's role as eavesdropper is going to be clarified and JKR's "careful wording" will be less ambiguous than it is now. I doubt that Voldemort has lost interest in the Prophecy, and Trelawney has been under Dumbledore's protection all these years despite his disinclination to continue having her subject taught at Hogwarts for a reason. She also has an unusually high profile in HBP for a staff member who's no longer Harry's teacher. (She's not quite the old fraud he thinks she is, either, if her card readings are any indication.) In OoP, BTW, the Prophecy was largely a plot device used by Dumbledore to stall and preoccupy Voldemort (to keep him focused on it rather than a bid for power) and on JKR's to bring in Occlumency and the supposed rescue mission to the MoM. It may serve a similar but less central role in DH as a reason for Voldemort to kidnap Trelawney. > Jeremiah: > > Yes, going after her would be a fantastic idea but, as we know from PoA, she doesn't recall these trance-like-states. I believe she is totally unaware of her "gift" and I think it would be very difficult for her to be tortured to tell LV or his Death Eaters about it. Since she has no memory I would assume it cannot be extracted, since eh has not "thoughts" about it I would also think you cannot look into her head and see anything about it. Carol responds: I'm not so sure that an extracted memory would be useless, assuming that Voldemort has access to a Pensieve. As we know from "Snape's Worst Memory" and JKR's remarks in an interview, a Pensieve memory is an objective record of the remembered event and contains elements that the person owning the memory was not aware of at the time, for example, the Marauders' conversation, which Severus, some distance away and absorbed in his exam questions did not hear, but which his unconscious mind nevertheless stored away. So a person who entered Trelawney's memory via a Pensieve would hear her Prophecy in its entirety even though she herself does not remember it. (It's possible that a visit to Snape's or Aberforth's memory would produce a similar result, but I'm not sure. Could a visitor to the memory hear the Prophecy through the closed door above the commotion outside? Would they be able to go through the closed door and witness the Trelawney/ Dumbledore interview?) Jeremiah: > What I mean about furthering the prophecy by furtherin Trelawney's character is this: DD told Harry that Harry believes in the prophecy too much. However, Trelawney claims she repeatedly told DD about the readings (with the Lightning Struck Tower and his impending doom) and he didn't put any faith in them but he still ended up pon the top of a tower and died. Putting faith in or lacking faith in a prophecy doesn't seem to change it, IMO. But, with Harry's prophecy we do not have a clear outcome, just that "one cannot live while the other survives" and that kind of thing but I do think that Trelawney's Prophecy should not be ignored to any extent by Harry or the others. it's decision-time for Harry. Does he find Trelawney to be trustworthy and does he recognize her abilities? (Or, does she even have any direct imput to the plot anymore nad we never see her again?) > Carol: I think her appearances in HBP foreshadow additional appearances in HBP, whether Harry believes in the Prophecy or not. (I wonder, BTW, whether the misty-eyed Luna, who seemed to be a favorite of Trelawney's and is the antithesis in every way of the rational, book-oriented Hermione, will end up as a Seer in her own right.) As you say, she was right about the Lightning-Struck Tower. I don't think that Dumbledore ignored her because he disbelieved her warnings; he knew that Draco was trying to kill him and clearly tried to thwart any attempts to bring DEs into Hogwarts by placing new spells and watching the passageways, overlooking only the Vanishing Cabinet in the RoR (unfortunately). Just as he told Harry that nothing Harry told him regarding the Snape/Draco conversation gave him cause for concern, he already knew, IMO, that disaster was pending, including his own possible or probable death, and he was planning accordingly all year, from the hiring of Snape as DADA professor to the visit to the Dursleys' and all those Pensieve visits and lessons with Harry. He didn't need Trelawney's warnings, and he might even have considered it to be to Trelawney's advantage not to be fully aware of her own gifts (and her consequent danger). At any rate, I'll be very surprised if we don't see Trelawney again. I predict that she'll play a small but important role in DH (far more intersting than those accursed Horcruxes). Carol the Far-Sighted (literally), who predicts that Snape will either give Trelawney the Draught of Living Death after kidnapping and pretending to kill her or rescue her in front of Harry, delightfully overthrowing all his expectations P.S. I really, really hope that I've gotten out all the typos and stupid errors this time and hope I haven't confused everybody with all my revised versions! From mros at xs4all.nl Tue Feb 20 22:13:00 2007 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:13:00 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. References: Message-ID: <003801c7553c$48740430$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 165220 Carol: >>The whole reason that civilized countries have copyright laws and punishments for plagiarism is that intellectual dishonesty--taking credit for someone else's work--is wrong. It's stealing ideas. Try taking an essay from the Internet and presenting it to your English professor as your own and see what happens.<< Marion: Even better: look at how the fans judge Lockhart. Look how Harry and Ron judge Lockhart. Lockhart took the achievements of other wizards and presented them as his own for his own personal glory and financial gain (he published books and sold them in great quantities - especially since the students of Hogwarts had to buy at least five of his books each in the year he was teaching *ka-ching!*) When a child (Ginny) is endangered and Lockhart has to chose being either unmasked as a cheat or overcoming his own foibles and trying to own up and help, he chooses to continue to cheat, trying to obliviate Harry and Ron. Alas for him, his spell backfires and he obliviates himself. Fandom went, "serves him right, that's what happens to lying cheats! If he had the courage to own up to his cheating, arose above his own limitations and tried to help Ginny we would forgive him for being a pompous cheat, but he cares more for his reputation than the life of a child, so serves him right, so there!" And frankly, who would blame them for thinking so. Harry, in HBP, took the achievements of the Halfblood Prince and presented them as his own for his own personal glory (well, the praise of his teacher) and personal gain (the Felix potion). When he harms another child (the child nearly dies) he is far more concerned with being unmasked as a cheat and losing his ill-got possesions than he is concerned with the fact that a child might have died as a result. So, when he is unmasked as a cheat and a lying and gets punished for it, do (some) fans cry, as they did with Lockhart, "serves him right that he got detention, he cheated all year, won a prize for a potion he wouldn't have had the faintest notion how to make without cheating and when a child is harmed, he is more concerned with saving face and not losing his book with which he cheated than with the fact that he nearly killed another child"? No, of course not. It's *Harry* doing the cheating, after all, and he's their *hero*. Now, Bart said: >>Traditionally, a hero is not a person without flaws; it is a normally flawed human being who manages to, in spite of these flaws, accomplish great and good things << and he is right about this, of course. But alas for him, this sentiment misses the point where Harry is concerned. Usually, in childrens' stories (and quite a few adult stories as well) the flawed hero does not even know he's flawed, until he finds the flaw in others, condemns it, recognises that he posesses the same flaw and does something about it. Harry condemns Lockhart for being the lying cheating son-of-a-witch that he is, yet when lies and cheats and tries to fob off other people's hard work as his own, *just as Lockhart did*, he does not even reflect on this. This is worrying, to say the least. Some of the fans on this list try to wiggle out of this uncomfortable dilemma by claiming that a goody two shoes of a hero is no fun hero, or that Harry was perfectly justified cheating because it was payback for having such a mean teacher all those years (and what would be the payback for the 'mean teacher' for having such a cheeky, always anwering back, always opnely challinging his authority student, I wonder?) or even that it was okay for Harry to use the Prince's notes because it's okay to use an advantage others don't have (it's just as okay for Lockhart to use other wizards accomplishments because Lockhart is very good at obliviating said wizards. Hey, if you've got a talent, it's okay to use it illegally for personal gain, right?) Sorry, I don't buy that. There's a word for people who condemn a flaw in others whilst ignoring it or even nurtering it in themselves; those kind of people are called 'hypocrites'. I'm sorry, fans-who-believe-Harry's-flatulence-doesn't smell , but Harry might be a fascinating protagonist, but he's not in any way a hero as I interpret the term. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 22:21:05 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:21:05 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheating at Potions (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165221 > Eggplant: > If I obtain a skill from reading a book I have not indulged in > plagiarism every time I exercise that skill. If I read a book on > chess and it improves my game I am not plagiarizing every time I > play. Betsy Hp: But if you learn a chess move from the book, get praised for it, and give the impression that you made that move up yourself, you're a liar at the very least. Which is why Harry felt guilty about passing the Prince's knowledge off as his own, and why he justified himself by tying it in with saving the world. > >>Ronin: > I don't think Harry was cheating at all. > Betsy Hp: Why, then, does Harry feel guilty? > >>Ronin: > I say, if it helps him to learn and find excitement in a subject > that he normally hates, more power to him. He needs to learn > potions if he wants to become an Auror and the Prince's notes are > helping him catch up. > Betsy Hp: Did Harry really learn anything? Why then was he the worst performer when tasked to make his own antidote? Unless Bezoars are a universal panacea (which they aren't, since wizards still worry about creating antidotes) Harry wouldn't pass the Potion's NEWTs. So he wouldn't become an Auror, Prince or no Prince. Much as I loved the relationship between Harry and the Prince (and I did love it ) I think the Prince was too much of a crutch for Harry when it came to potions class. Instead of learning, Harry relied on the Prince to figure it out for him. Betsy Hp From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 20 22:29:05 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:29:05 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheathing in Potions in HBP WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165222 > Alla: > > On that I disagree. I am thinking that Slughorn's play over Snape's > line ( point for your cheek) makes us think that karma is involved > here and heavily. Does not make what Harry does a good thing, sure, > but does not make me over concerned about it either. > > As Neri said, life is not fair. Draco had a teacher on his side for > five years, this year it is Harry's turn to have something on his > side. > > It is not fair, no, I am not arguing that, but I am also disagreeing > that Harry will not learn anything. He after all did those potions > even with Prince instructions, something may stay in his head. > > I am also laughing over every kid knows what is wrong with cheating. > > Trust me cultural differences on that are big, but I will offlist > you, since it is OT, I guess. Magpie: I think the karma thing is there if we want it--let's face it, everyone always enjoys Snape doing a slow burn! (Oddly Snape doesn't tell Slughorn that Harry is using his old textbook or demand any proof of his skill.)None of the kids should be prevented from using better instructions--I think Hermione's an idiot for not using the book herself. (And I'm amazed she's not interested in comparing to see what the Prince is thinking.) The advantage Harry has could have happened to anyone. Maybe another kid would have shared it with friends who appreciated it, I don't know. But it could have happened to anyone. Old textbooks with notes were fairly common in my school. And I think there are things that do stay in Harry's head about the book--he remembered the bezoar. He remembers the spells. However, the part I'm interested in is where Harry is where Harry is presenting himself as coming up with this stuff himself because he understands the laws of Potions when he isn't--not because I think it's so terrible that Harry would do that or I need Slughorn to know that Harry isn't so great in Potions. But just to say that's clearly what's going on--not Harry's getting extra tutoring when Harry himself couldn't make it any clearer that his success in Potions is being misunderstood by Slughorn as something other than it is, and that his success disappears when he's not following the instructions. He hasn't, for instance, learned enough from the Prince that when stuck back with the "official" instructions he can say, "Hey, the Half-Blood Prince noted that when you're dealing with an herb in this family, if you're using it for strength, it's better to slice the plants to the northeast--of course, because that direction won't disrupt the flow of strength in the leaf!" Or whatever. He's not gaining any *understanding* of Potions from the Prince. He's learning certain spells from him, but the experiments the Prince is doing in Potions are beyond him. The book in itself is very valuable--he's just lucky to have it. In the hands of another student it might have made a great study tool. It's not bad that Harry has it--it doesn't seem like Snape's Potions improvements are meant to be a big secret. But he is using it to pretend to understand exactly those things that he doesn't to Slughorn. He knows he's not better at Potions than Hermione (or probably than most of the rest of the class), he knows he hasn't added peppermint because he thought it would help with the nose-tweaking side-effect. He knows his own joke about the bezoars is masking his own lack of understanding of Golplott's Law and not making a clever in-joke about it. That's where Harry is just happily letting someone keep their wrong impression. It's fine that Harry does that, and I think if someone feels the need to turn it into something else, something less dishonest, that indicates they have more of a problem with what Harry is doing than I do. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 22:43:22 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:43:22 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheathing in Potions in HBP WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165223 > Magpie: > I think the karma thing is there if we want it--let's face it, > everyone always enjoys Snape doing a slow burn! (Oddly Snape doesn't > tell Slughorn that Harry is using his old textbook or demand any > proof of his skill.) Alla: Well, sure but I gave you a specific reason why I think Karma is here. I do not think that this is a coincidence that Slugghorn uses Snape's line, if a bit changed. I think it is there for a reason. I mean, one can think so or not of course. Oh, and could you introduce me to more people, hehe, who enjoy Snape getting a slow burn? I am sort of serious actually, because I think that I am one of the very few list members left who does :) Magpie: > However, the part I'm interested in is where Harry is where Harry is > presenting himself as coming up with this stuff himself because he > understands the laws of Potions when he isn't--not because I think > it's so terrible that Harry would do that or I need Slughorn to know > that Harry isn't so great in Potions. But just to say that's clearly > what's going on--not Harry's getting extra tutoring when Harry > himself couldn't make it any clearer that his success in Potions is > being misunderstood by Slughorn as something other than it is, and > that his success disappears when he's not following the > instructions. > Alla: I already said that I agree with you on that, yes, I just don't agree that Harry is a mediocre student, but that has nothing to do with cheating. I think Harry's "E" means that he is far from being mediocre, but he is not a Potions genuis, sure. Marion: > Sorry, I don't buy that. There's a word for people who condemn a flaw in others whilst ignoring it or even nurtering it in themselves; those kind of people are called 'hypocrites'. Alla: You are talking about the HP characters here, yes? Please tell me that you are. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Feb 20 22:54:51 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:54:51 -0000 Subject: Voldermort learning the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165224 > SSSusan: > Right. That *was* weird that, after all his efforts in OotP, he just > then gave up on it. We knew that DD figured Voldy would stop going > at it the *way* he had in that year, by boring into Harry's thoughts > via their mind connection, but why didn't he seem to be working on it > in at all HBP? > Pippin: I think the real mystery is why Voldemort didn't try to hear the full text of the prophecy before GH. Surely with Rookwood in place, smuggling himself into the ministry to lift the prophecy from its shelf would not have been impossible. Yet it seems he never tried. Was it because he thought he knew the full text already? From Snape or some other spy? After GH, of course, Voldemort would be having doubts about the veracity of his spy (or spies), and he would be obsessed with using the record at the ministry to check on them. But with that destroyed, there'd be no record Dumbledore didn't have access to, and so no record that Voldemort could be sure had not been tampered with. Pippin From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Feb 20 23:13:05 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:13:05 -0000 Subject: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165225 "colebiancardi" wrote: > everyone who was sitting in Slughorn's > 6th year Potions classroom got "O"'s > with the exception of Ron & Harry. Then "O" is a more common grade than "E",and something is SERIOUSLY wrong! > We know they got "E"'s. Only Ron & Harry > needed loaner books Draco's family has money to burn and aren't afraid to pull stings, I'm sure they could get the wizard equivalent of Federal Express ship a brand spanking new potions book from Flourish and Blots to Hogwarts overnight. And from the evidence of the preceding 5 books nothing would even hint that Draco could ever get a lofty grade like an "O" in potions, not in his wildest dreams. Even a "E" would be pushing the envelope for Draco. Eggplant From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 23:25:10 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:25:10 -0000 Subject: Freud and JKR / Id vs. Superego (was:Re: Seeing gray in a black and white book) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165226 > >>Lilygale: > > My (neo-Freudian) interpretation is that Harry really and truly > > has an instinctive, id-driven desire to hurt Bellatrix in > > retaliation for killing Sirius. At the same time (and this is > > what determines Harry's moral stance), his ego and superego > > restrain his behavior by tempering his emotions. That is, > > Harry's sense of self and sense of morality will not allow his id > > to act with full, infantile emotional force. They hold him back > > to the extent that, when he casts Crucio to satisfy his id, he > > also cannot really cause harm because his ego/superego will not > > allow that. Harry wants to hurt, but he could not live with the > > consequences of that evil. Harry's actions reflect his surface > > conscious wishes/desires, but he is also controlled by layers > > underneath, without conscious awareness. > >>Carol: > Well, that's one way to look at it, but I'm not sure that JKR had > neo-Freudian psychology in mind. I'll grant you that not all > intention is conscious (including the intention of the author), but > I'm not sure that I find labeling the various elements of the mind > all that productive. > Betsy Hp: IIRC, there's a picture out there of JKR's bookshelf, with a book on or by Freud in it. And what with Imperius and Occlumency and Leglimency, I think JKR may have had *some* sort of compartmentalizing of the human psyche in mind. Gosh, the sorting out of the Hogwarts students as per Water, Fire, Earth or Air also speaks, IMO, to a partitioning out of emotional elements. Which, for good or ill, Freud spoke a bit about. (There's also a werewolf in the books, which I believe is a myth with fairly strong Freudian overtones to it. Talk about id versus superego! ) > >>Bruce Alan Wilson: > According to what I have read in the literature of psychology and > psychiatry, Freud's theories have been pretty well exploded. Hence, > I distrust a Freudian or neo-Freudian analysis of anything. Betsy Hp: Yes, but Freud's theories and ideas are still majorly impacting the Western world today. His worth as an actual psychiatrist might be in question (or out and out dismissed), but he's still shaped the modern world enough to seep into art and literature. And I don't think that influence can be so easily dismissed. > >>Carol: > I think it's simply that, much as he wants to punish Bellatrix in > that moment, he can't hold onto the desire to inflict pain as she > does... > I don't think conscience (superego) has anything to do with it, or > he'd have figured out by now exactly why he shouldn't use it. Betsy Hp: Hmm, but Harry *still* is pretty bad about thinking things through. Hence his totally over the top hatred of Snape in the opening of HBP. It's an emotion that feels good, so Harry goes with it. There's a lot about Harry that's pure instinct. Which is sometimes a good thing and a strength. But I think Harry's got to engage his rational, thinking side too. Because sometimes Harry's instinct is wrong. (To tie into another thread: Harry's instinct to continue passing the Prince's potion work off as his own ends up not helping him in the end. Slughorn doesn't share his information because Harry is so good at Potions. Instead, it's when Harry makes a conscious decision to play to Slughorn's emotions as Lily's son and "the Chosen One", that he gets results.) > >>Lilygale: > The Prince has seduced Harry into thinking that offensive spells > are OK. > >>Carol: > But you're crediting an active will to the HBP's notes, written for > his own eyes twenty years before. > > If Harry is being seduced, it's not by the book but by his own > desire to learn and use new hexes and, possibly, to show up > Hermione in a class where she's always done better than he has, or, > alternatively, to lap up Slughorn's praise and attention, which he > can't bring himself to admit he doesn't deserve. > Betsy Hp: I think you're taking Lilygale to literally here. (Though of course I can't speak for her. ) I took her meaning to be more that the emotion the Prince was putting into his book was a type of emotion that Harry connected to. Which is why Harry felt such a *personal* connection to the book and was so very sure it was written by a boy. It was more than an instructional tool. Harry *felt* something. Harry's defense of the book (or more properly the Prince) was based on much more than a love of Slughorn's praise or the coolness of the hexes. Otherwise, Ron would have felt as "connected" to the Prince as Harry did. The Prince became a friend of Harry's. And I think it's based a lot on the fact that emotionally Harry and the Prince are in very similar states. (If you don't like calling it id, we could call it George? ) > >>Lilygale: > By casting Sectumsempra instead of another known spell, Harry is > trusting his "friends" judgment. But why? Because his id really > really wants to hurt Draco (Harry's felt that urge for years) ? and > he justifies this urge by rationalizing that he can trust his > friend. > > In the heat of the moment, Harry was governed by his darker side > (id) rather than his ego. It's an understandable error given the > heat of the moment, but I agree with others who hope that Harry > learns to understand his own impulses and desires more thoroughly. > >>Carol: > I don't know that id or even trusting his friend has anything to do > with it. > Betsy Hp: It was the animal need to inflict pain on someone who's hurting you versus the cool and calm judgment needed to win a fight. Where ever people come down on this issue (and I really don't want to drag everyone back into the bathroom ) I think everyone agrees that it was risky for Harry to use an unknown and untested spell. He was lucky it was something that actually stopped Draco. (Would have sucked if it'd just squirted stink puss at Draco, for example.) The Prince, IMO, is all about animal need (or the id) at the point he invented that spell. This is a boy on his way to becoming a Death Eater, after all. And it's not that I think Harry is in any danger of joining Voldemort (I can't think of any way he'd do such a thing), but I *do* think Harry is in danger of allowing his anger and pain to control his decision making. And, unfortunately, the Prince sometimes backed up or encouraged Harry's animal (or id) side. Betsy Hp From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 23:31:48 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:31:48 -0000 Subject: Voldermort learning the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165227 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Could the same be true for Trelawney? Since she remembers > *something* about the night she delivered The Prophecy -- even if > it's just the interruption part -- could someone extract that > memory, place it in a pensieve, and "walk around in it," to > discover more about the scene, even hear the entire prophecy? zanooda: Even without the Pensieve LV managed to get memories out of Bertha Jorkins. He had to break through a very powerful memory charm using very unkind methods, but he succeded and she told him about things that she was not supposed to remember (Crouch Jr. being alive and under Imperius curse). Trelawney was present (naturally) when the Prophecy was made - this means she has the memory of it somewhere in her head, and there may be a way to extract this memory, IMO. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 20 23:40:12 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:40:12 -0000 Subject: O vs E in Potions. Again. (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165228 > >>colebiancardi: > > everyone who was sitting in Slughorn's > > 6th year Potions classroom got "O"'s > > with the exception of Ron & Harry. > >>Eggplant: > Then "O" is a more common grade than "E",and something is SERIOUSLY > wrong! Betsy Hp: No, no, it's just your counting. The Potions class has a small representation from the various Houses. Not a majority. Therefore, "O" is less common than "E". > >>colebiancardi: > > We know they got "E"'s. Only Ron & Harry > > needed loaner books > >>Eggplant: > Draco's family has money to burn and aren't afraid to pull stings, > I'm sure they could get the wizard equivalent of Federal Express > ship a brand spanking new potions book from Flourish and Blots to > Hogwarts overnight. Betsy Hp: Prove it. Seriously. You're asking me to just accept that this massive manuvering went on in the background, show me some canon. > >>Eggplant: > And from the evidence of the preceding 5 books nothing would even > hint that Draco could ever get a lofty grade like an "O" in > potions, not in his wildest dreams. Even a "E" would be pushing the > envelope for Draco. Betsy Hp: If you're so sure, than I'm confident you have canon to back your claim. I'd love for you to share it. Betsy Hp From mros at xs4all.nl Tue Feb 20 23:42:01 2007 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 00:42:01 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Harry cheathing in Potions in HBP WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene References: Message-ID: <000901c75548$b85da6a0$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 165229 Marion: > Sorry, I don't buy that. There's a word for people who condemn a flaw in others whilst ignoring it or even nurtering it in themselves; those kind of people are called 'hypocrites'. Alla: You are talking about the HP characters here, yes? Please tell me that you are. Marion: Well of course I am. Not only would it be totally gauche of me to make an ad hoc comment on this list (or indeed in any debate), but I also talked in my reply about people who condemn a flaw in others whilst ignoring or nurtering the same flaw in themselves *just after* I talked about Harry condeming cheating Lockhart in CoS whilst not noticing his own 'pulling a Lockhart' in HBP. How did you leap from my assessing Harry's behaviour into accusing me of attacking my list sibs with personal remarks? Did you simply misinterpret and misunderstand my post or are you trying to bully me with "Are you talking about *me*, bub? Are you talking about *ME*?!!" scare tactics? Or do you simply identify with Harry's character to such a degree that any slight to his character becomes a personal attack on *you*? Well, whatever the reason, rest assured that I was talking about me being of the opinion that Harry, the character from a book and *not any real person on this list*, has nasty hypocritical tendencies. IMO of course. You might disagree with me of course. Which no doubt you do. Night, night, don't let the bedbugs bite Marion (signing off since it's past midnight Over Here) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Wed Feb 21 00:14:52 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 00:14:52 -0000 Subject: Voldermort learning the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165230 SSSusan: > See, that's just it. I can't figure out how knowing the full > prophecy WOULD change much. ??? So he'd know for certain > (if he interprets it how DD & Harry did) that either he's gotta > kill the little snot or the little snot's gonna kill him, but since > he's ALREADY determined to kill the little snot, it wouldn't > exactly mark a change in his strategy. houyhnhnm: Since *we* know the whole prophecy, we can see that LV's knowing it would not change much, but Voldemort doesn't know what it is he doesn't know. So, for all he knows, the rest of the prophecy might contain the secret of Harry's defeat. Pippin: > I think the real mystery is why Voldemort didn't try to hear the > full text of the prophecy before GH. Surely with Rookwood in > place, smuggling himself into the ministry to lift the prophecy > from its shelf would not have been impossible. Yet it seems he > never tried. Was it because he thought he knew the full text > already? From Snape or some other spy? > After GH, of course, Voldemort would be having doubts > about the veracity of his spy (or spies), and he would be > obsessed with using the record at the ministry to check on them. houyhnhnm: That's an interesting thought. Perhaps LV's motive in going after the prophecy had less to do with finding a way to defeat Harry and more to do with finding out whether he had been lied to originally. The whole prophecy timeline is murky to me. I wouldn't be surprised if a major twist in connection with it is revealed in DH. I can't even remember if we heard directly or indirectly from Voldemort that he *knew* there was more to the prophecy, or if we are just assuming he did from Dumbledore's words to Harry. (And neither do I think we can *assume* that he knew about Trelawney.) I really need to start re-reading the whole series again from the beginning. From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Wed Feb 21 00:15:44 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 16:15:44 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldermort learning the prophecy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702201615y42d520e1y71171eebf63a530a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165231 SSSusan OTOH, she *does* have a recollection of *part* of the night that she delivered The Prophecy (the main one, I mean, at the Hog's Head). What she does remember is Snape being in the hallway and being removed from the premises. --------------------------- Carol responds: I'm not so sure that an extracted memory would be uselsee, assuming that Voldemort has access to a Pensieve. As we know from "Snape's Worst Memory" and JKR's remarks in an interview, a Pensieve memory is an objective record of the remembered event and contains elements that the person owning the memory was not aware of at the time, for example, the Marauders' conversation, which Severus, some distance away and absorbed in his exam questions did not hear, but which his unconscious mind nevertheless stored away. So a person who entered Trelawney's memory via a Pensieve would hear her Prophecy in its entirety even though she herself does not remember it. (It's possible that a visit to Snape's or Aberforth's memory would produce a similar result, but I'm not sure. Could a visitor to the memory hear the Prophecy through the closed door above the commotion outside? Would they be able to go through the closed door and witness the Trelawney/ Dumbledore interview?) Jeremiah: > SSSusan, I see what you mean by dropping the prohecy plot-line in > HBP, however, I think JKR was furthering Trelawney (and, in effect, > the truth about the prophecy) by focusing on 2 encounters between > Harry and Trelawney. (Both involving Sherry and babbling) but her > accuracy is pretty good. She detects Harry with her cards and sees > the "Lighting Struck Tower." Even though she's not very good at > being precise, she'd got something going on and I think JKR was > sacrificing the prophecy sub-plot and supplanting it with > Trelawney's ability to "detect" (that's the only way I can describe > it because she's not very precise) the future. > ...Trelawney claims she repeatedly told DD about the readings (with > the Lightning Struck Tower and his impending doom) and he didn't > put any faith in them but he still ended up pon the top of a tower > and died. ...I do think that Trelawney's Prophecy should not be > ignored to any extent by Harry or the others. it's decision-time > for Harry. Does he find Trelawney to be trustworthy and does he > recognize her abilities? SSSusan: Very interesting! It does seem that JKR went to pains to show us how Trelawney was sort of predicting accurately. I like your word "detect" rather than actually "predicting;" it fits. So the question, as you're suggesting, is: Why did JKR do that *after* the prophecy plot line seemed to have been dropped? Maybe it *was* to keep us thinking about Trelawney and how she shouldn't be ignored. ======================================== ===>Jeremiah: (responds) OMG! Totally didn't think about how Harry could hear and see every bit of Snape's memory with the Murauders. Uh, Deeerrrr.... (feeling foolish that i'd forget that. LOL) I think JKR placed Trelawney's "seeing" ability after we have had 3 established people mock her. 1) McGonagall ruthlessly mocks her at Christmas dinner, 2) Hermione storms out of the classroom, 3) Dumbledore tells Harry that he thought she wasn't going to be good and reluctantly goes to see her, anyway. (that's not in any particular order except for "That's the order I remembered them in"). Since we have 3 educated people blowing her off it would make sense that the reader (us) would reject any trait of legitimacy... and then JKR carefully gives us the clues while Trelawney is reading cards while walking down the hall. (yeah, I freaked when I read it... had to go and re-read all her appearnces). Now, getting back to the question at hand... We have 3 people who we are sure were at the Hog's head: DD, Snape and Aberforth (though he's not been proven to be there). DD's memory has been seen. we had the memory (and we don't know if he's kept it extracted. It may still be in the Pensive) but if Snape and Aberforth were there and the door wasn't shut before Snape was booted... well, we'd have 2 other ways to see the prophesy. Voldemort knows Snape was there. Maybe Voldemort is being short-sighted and won't pry the memory out of Snape's head to find out what happened? That makes me think the door was closed and if the memory is on the otherside of an obstacle you can't see what happened. becaue I'm sure Snape, having use of DD's Pensive, would have gone to the memory himself and found out what was said. And then... well, LV would most likely know if he's ESE!Snape. (Unless it is DDM!Snape and then LV wouldn't know... but the circumstances for Snape knowing would be the same). So, I guess the other question is: Exactly how much does Snape know? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 00:31:38 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 00:31:38 -0000 Subject: Harry, Hermione, and Potions WAS Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165232 > zgirnius: > > > Plagiarism is still plagiarism even > > when no money is made from it. > Eggplant: > If I obtain a skill from reading a book I have not indulged in > plagiarism every time I exercise that skill. If I read a book on chess > and it improves my game I am not plagiarizing every time I play. zgirnius: If on the other hand, someone comliments you on the new line you invented to defend the King's Indian opening, and wonders how you keep coming up with such things, and you say, gee thanks, instead of explaining you read an article on it in a chess book, you are being dishonest. *That's* the bit people are objecting to. > > He [Snape] is said to write potions > > instruction on the board - I believe > > this is because he taught the > > improved methids. Eggplant: > The difficulty Hermione was having in potions was entirely of her own > doing. Harry offered to share the HBP book with her but she refused > and insisted on doing things the boring old textbook way. This > unexpected streak of intellectual pig-headedness does not speak well > for her success in the coming years. I hope she gets over it. zgirnius: Actually, I was disappointed too, but not because she refused to use the improved instructions. In that she acted correctly. What she should have done after the first class, or at most the second, whe it was clear the first was not a fluke, would be to read the notes in Harry's book, go away and do research in the library if necessary, and figure out *why* the HBP's instructions were working better. (This would be like someone else's kid with a lousy physics teacher and physicist dad - after dad's help, he actually could solve a similar problem on his own.) --zgirnius, who expects, sadly, that she will need to explain a lot of math to her kids when they are older, but will most certainly NOT let them use her hints without understanding them. From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Feb 21 00:38:56 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 19:38:56 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: <003801c7553c$48740430$63fe54d5@Marion> References: <003801c7553c$48740430$63fe54d5@Marion> Message-ID: <45DB94A0.2000809@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165233 Marion Ros wrote: > Usually, in childrens' stories (and quite a few adult stories as > well) the flawed hero does not even know he's flawed, until he finds > the flaw in others, condemns it, recognises that he posesses the same > flaw and does something about it. Harry condemns Lockhart for being > the lying cheating son-of-a-witch that he is, yet when lies and > cheats and tries to fob off other people's hard work as his own, > *just as Lockhart did*, he does not even reflect on this. Bart: EXCELLENT point. Let's hope that JKR does this in Book 7. I've been waiting for Harry to finally differentiate between what was important and what was not since OOP. As I have mentioned before, I would have loved for a Slytherin, especially one who was in the "Weasley is King" group, to join the DA, and, when challenged, give a withering look worthy of Phineas Black and say, "That's children's games. This is real life!" At least he has learned that fighting Voldemort is more important than good grades and teachers' praise. Bart From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Tue Feb 20 23:52:32 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:52:32 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Harry cheating at Potions (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002701c7554a$366e7d20$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165234 --Betsy HP Wrote-- >>>Why, then, does Harry feel guilty?<<< --Ronin's Comments-- Probably because of Hermione riding his tail all through the school year. She made him feel guilty for stealing her thunder at something. --Betsy HP Wrote-- >>>Did Harry really learn anything? Why then was he the worst performer when tasked to make his own antidote? Unless Bezoars are a universal panacea (which they aren't, since wizards still worry about creating antidotes) Harry wouldn't pass the Potion's NEWTs. So he wouldn't become an Auror, Prince or no Prince. Much as I loved the relationship between Harry and the Prince (and I did love it ) I think the Prince was too much of a crutch for Harry when it came to potions class. Instead of learning, Harry relied on the Prince to figure it out for him.<<< --Ronin's Comments-- It remains to be seen if he has retained what he learned. Nobody had an easy time with the antidotes. Even Hermione struggled to get her antidotes ready and she was the only one who was even close. I think Harry will remember about Bezoars. I know I will look for one if I'm ever poisoned. lol There is no single cure to every poison, just as there is no one cure for every disease. But, knowing about bezoars is a pretty good idea considering it is the closest thing to it. It may be a rare ingredient, but I'd hazard a guess to say it's no more rare that unicorn hair or what have you when you are in an emergency situation. He might even decide to carry one with him from now on. But really, even if he doesn't retain half of what he read, it's more than he would've learned had it not been for the book. We really can't say what he'd achieve on his NEWTs, can we? Did we expect him to get an E on his OWLs, based on his performance in Snape's classes? He's not an idiot. He just doesn't have much interest in the subject and being harassed by his teachers. (Given how Snape liked to pick on him, he probably preferred to lay low in class rather than draw attention to himself and leave himself open for even more bullying) Not even to mention the other extraordinary things he has to deal with each year aside from his schoolwork. The MOM, Umbridge, The Chamber of Secrets, Sirius's death, an Azkaban escapee wanting to murder him, Malfoy wanting revenge on him, etc., etc...It's a wonder he can manage any of his school subjects. The Prince's notes may have been a crutch through some of the harder theories in class, but he definitely learned something from it. (Sectum Sempra for one, Levicorpus and who knows what else.) The main thing is that, the book sparked his interest and caused him to think about things potions, spells or otherwise. That is what is most crucial to learning anything. Just as the pensieve memories are someone else's memories, he still learns from them. (Critical information is learned, I might add). The purpose of a textbook is to demonstrate the methods and history of a subject. The Prince's notes don't actually mix the potions for Harry. It doesn't do anything for him that the ordinary textbook wouldn't do (Except for maybe peaking his interest and thought on the subjects & being more accurate in most cases). Therefore, I hold to my opinion that he was in no way cheating by using the book. I also see no reason why Harry won't pass his NEWTS or become an Auror. (Assuming he goes back and takes them) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 00:55:22 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 00:55:22 -0000 Subject: Harry's "friend," the HBP (Was: Freud and JKR / Id vs. Superego ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165235 Betsy Hp: > > The Prince, IMO, is all about animal need (or the id) at the point he invented that spell. This is a boy on his way to becoming a Death Eater, after all. And it's not that I think Harry is in any danger of joining Voldemort (I can't think of any way he'd do such a thing), but I *do* think Harry is in danger of allowing his anger and pain to control his decision making. And, unfortunately, the Prince sometimes backed up or encouraged Harry's animal (or id) side. Carol responds: >From my point ov view, Sectumsempra is about a boy on his way to becoming a Death Eater. "For Enemies" more than suggests that he has revenge on his mind. But Muffliato is just a charm to allow a kid to talk with his friends without being overheard. The toenail hex and Langlock are no worse than any of the other hexes that the kids throw at each other, and Levicorpus (which I think is a charm rather than a hex, if it matters) was so popular, according to Lupin, that practically everyone, including future Order member/hero James Potter was using it. Levicorpus even comes with its own countercurse. What's Dark or future Death Eaterish about any of that? And the Potions hints aren't Dark, either. The Bezoar crack is snarky, but it saves Ron's life. And what is Dark about adding a peppermint leaf to avoid a side effect or using the back of a silver knife to crush a sopophorous bean or stirring clockwise after every six clockwise strokes? Can you find one Potions hint that's even slightly indicative of a desire for revenge? I can't think of any. They indicate the same brilliance as a Potions maker that the adult Snape first shows in creating curtains of black and purple fire, each with its separate antidote. Teen!Snape sounds like he's on his way to becoming a Healer or researcher to me. Too bad Lucius Malfoy or the Slytherin gang or whoever recruited him took advantage of the anger provoked by Severus's Hogwarts enemies in his "worst memory" and the so-called Prank, and of Severus's hunger for recognition (still evident as an adult if the Order of Merlin is any indication) and directed him toward Voldemort. As for Harry, I agree that he's in danger of letting the desire for revenge control him, especially with regard to Snape (ironic given that Severus's desire for revenge was primarily with regard to Harry's father). But that's not what Harry identifies with in the HBP's Potions book as far as I can tell. He's interested in the Prince's creativity and, sad to say, in getting credit for the Prince's work. (He can tell that the Prince is a boy, probably because more boys than girls are interested in hexes and because of the tone of the Bezoar remark, but I'm not sure that the Prince provides any personal information for Harry to identify with except on this general level. Harry can't even tell that the Prince is a Slytherin.) Carol, who wonders if the HBP's teachers realized what a genius he was and guesses that Slughorn did but McGonagall didn't From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 21 00:07:50 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 19:07:50 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Harry cheathing in Potions in HBP WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002c01c7554c$59d81f80$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165236 --Magpie Wrote-- >>> He hasn't, for instance, learned enough from the Prince that when stuck back with the "official" instructions he can say, "Hey, the Half-Blood Prince noted that when you're dealing with an herb in this family, if you're using it for strength, it's better to slice the plants to the northeast--of course, because that direction won't disrupt the flow of strength in the leaf!" Or whatever. He's not gaining any *understanding* of Potions from the Prince. He's learning certain spells from him, but the experiments the Prince is doing in Potions are beyond him. The book in itself is very valuable--he's just lucky to have it. In the hands of another student it might have made a great study tool. It's not bad that Harry has it--it doesn't seem like Snape's Potions improvements are meant to be a big secret. But he is using it to pretend to understand exactly those things that he doesn't to Slughorn. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- I have to agree with most of what you've said here. Especially the bit about Hermione being an idiot. lol (I love Hermione, but I wanted to punch her myself through most of THBP) Anyway, it's a good point you make about Harry not really understanding what the Prince is actually saying. But, I believe that it's got Harry thinking about things and it may just take time to sink in. They are pretty advanced theories and I think, like apparation, he'll make his splinches before it finally gets through. One thing I want to say to Hermione though is, "Shut up Hermione! Maybe you should consider your own behavior next time you are using a time turner to get to classes". lol On the matter of Harry taking credit for the theories, I can see that some people might consider this poor behavior. Personally, I don't. I think he made an attempt, but it was brushed off by Slughorn. Why press the issue? Especially since he didn't know who to give credit to. I don't recall any point where Harry said, "Yes, Professor...I thought of that on my own". Although, I'm only two thirds of the way through my re-reading, so I may withdraw that last bit. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 01:06:38 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 01:06:38 -0000 Subject: Draco as a student (WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165237 Eggplant: > Then "O" is a more common grade than "E",and something is SERIOUSLY wrong! zgirnius: No, it could also mean that no other students with Es, however few or many there might have been, opted to take NEWT potions when the option became open to them by Slughorn's more liberal policies. Perhaps they don't like Potions any more than Harry and Ron do. Eggplant: > And from the evidence of the preceding 5 books nothing > would even hint that Draco could ever get a lofty grade like an "O" in > potions, not in his wildest dreams. Even a "E" would be pushing the > envelope for Draco. zgirnius: I recall one mention of Draco's performance in a class of Snape's, and it was an instance where he was complimented for his slug stewing technique, in the very first class. Lots of instances of his being nasty to Harry and Ron, sure, but not having lousy Potions. Where do you get this idea that he is bad at Potions? In general, I would say the evidence favors the idea that Draco is overall an excellent student academically in all his subjects. He was chosen as Prefect over Zabini and Nott, who at least are known not to be morons in the style of Crabbe and Goyle. Dumbledore's comment to Harry at the end of OotP also indicates that Snape did not dictate this choice, Dumbledore must have agreed. In addition to his Prefect status, I think Lucius' comment in CoS, about Draco doing worse than a 'girl of no wizarding family' indicates that it is not laughable to compare his grades to that girl's. If Draco has a bunch of A's, I don't think his father would bother to berate him for losing out to Hermione, he would complain of his utter mediocrity instead. Also in CoS, I don't think Snape would have picked a weak student from Slytherin to partner Harry in the Duelling Club. Do you think he was trying to make Harry look good? I think he picked Draco because Draco is the best. In GoF, Draco creates the buttons that say "Support Cedric Diggory" and change to "Potter Sucks". Looks like he's also good at Charms, to me. And finally in HBP, he comes up with the Vanishing Cabinet plan on his own. It is clever, and again includes difficult using magic. He needs to fix the cabinet himself. He needs to use the Protean Charm to create the coins for communicating with Rosmerta. If he indeed Imperiused her, that's an advanced Dark spell. --zgirnius From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 02:07:33 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 02:07:33 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheating at Potions (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: <002701c7554a$366e7d20$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165238 > >>Betsy Hp: > > >>>Why, then, does Harry feel guilty?<<< > >>Ronin: > Probably because of Hermione riding his tail all through the school > year. She made him feel guilty for stealing her thunder at > something. Betsy Hp: I don't think Hermione has this sort of power over Harry. She's never been able to make him feel guilty about something Harry felt he was right about before. Usually when Hermione does her guilt routine and Harry doesn't think she's in the right, he's annoyed by her. So Harry's guilt, IMO, point to something he's feeling all by himself. > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Did Harry really learn anything? Why then was he the worst > > performer when tasked to make his own antidote? > > >>>Ronin: > It remains to be seen if he has retained what he learned. Nobody > had an easy time with the antidotes. > Betsy Hp: Yes, but Harry was hopeless. He didn't even know how to start. Everyone struggled, but they were *doing* something. The Prince didn't cover that particular area because he had nothing to add, so Harry didn't study it. That's the crutch problem. He's relying on the Prince to do *all* of his thinking. Does he get something good out of it? Sure! But he's also got a bit too dependent. > >>Ronin: > Therefore, I hold to my opinion that he was in no way cheating by > using the book. > Betsy Hp: I think he cheated during the contest for the Felix. Harry had a cheat sheet the other students didn't have. And he's been lying the entire year. I'm not saying we need to hang him. But he's not been behaving with total nobility. Betsy Hp From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 02:12:08 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 02:12:08 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheathing in Potions in HBP WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene In-Reply-To: <000901c75548$b85da6a0$63fe54d5@Marion> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165239 > Marion: > > > Sorry, I don't buy that. There's a word for people who condemn a > flaw in others whilst ignoring it or even nurtering it in themselves; > those kind of people are called 'hypocrites'. > > > Alla: > > You are talking about the HP characters here, yes? Please tell me > that you are. > > Marion: > Well of course I am. Not only would it be totally gauche of me to make an ad hoc comment on this list (or indeed in any debate), but I also talked in my reply about people who condemn a flaw in others whilst ignoring or nurtering the same flaw in themselves *just after* I talked about Harry condeming cheating Lockhart in CoS whilst not noticing his own 'pulling a Lockhart' in HBP. > > How did you leap from my assessing Harry's behaviour into accusing me of attacking my list sibs with personal remarks? > Alla: That probably happened because in that very paragraph you talked about how fans assessed Harry's cheating and Lockhart cheating. " Marion: Some of the fans on this list try to wiggle out of this uncomfortable dilemma by claiming that a goody two shoes of a hero is no fun hero, or that Harry was perfectly justified cheating because it was payback for having such a mean teacher all those years (and what would be the payback for the 'mean teacher' for having such a cheeky, always anwering back, always opnely challinging his authority student, I wonder?) or even that it was okay for Harry to use the Prince's notes because it's okay to use an advantage others don't have (it's just as okay for Lockhart to use other wizards accomplishments because Lockhart is very good at obliviating said wizards. Hey, if you've got a talent, it's okay to use it illegally for personal gain, right?) Sorry, I don't buy that. There's a word for people who condemn a flaw in others whilst ignoring it or even nurtering it in themselves; those kind of people are called 'hypocrites'. I'm sorry, fans-who-believe-Harry's-flatulence-doesn't smell , but Harry might be a fascinating protagonist, but he's not in any way a hero as I interpret the term." Alla: But I am very happy that I have misunderstood you. Please forgive me for my mistake and thank you for your clarification. From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Feb 21 04:10:52 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:10:52 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. References: Message-ID: <005f01c7556e$4842f660$ba80400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165240 > "colebiancardi" wrote: > >> everyone who was sitting in Slughorn's >> 6th year Potions classroom got "O"'s >> with the exception of Ron & Harry. Eggplant: > Then "O" is a more common grade than "E",and something is SERIOUSLY wrong! Magpie: Not everyone who gets an E had to take Potions. The students in the class do not prove O was the most common grade. It's only the most common grade in the NEWT Potions class, which isn't unusual, I'll bet. Eggplant: > Draco's family has money to burn and aren't afraid to pull stings, I'm > sure they could get the wizard equivalent of Federal Express ship a > brand spanking new potions book from Flourish and Blots to Hogwarts > overnight. And from the evidence of the preceding 5 books nothing > would even hint that Draco could ever get a lofty grade like an "O" in > potions, not in his wildest dreams. Even a "E" would be pushing the > envelope for Draco. Magpie: Draco does not have to have pulled any strings for Federal Express (why on earth go to the trouble of making that up? Why would only Draco need this kind of fanwank?), nor is getting an E pushing an envelope. The character's always been shown to do fine in Potions, and there's nothing out of the ordinary in his getting outstanding on the test. After five books of Draco being the Potions teacher's favorite I'm surprised his being an A student would be a shock. Draco has never been associated with bad grades from Harry's pov. His dad's demanding, we can be pretty sure he got a higher grade than Harry on his Practice OWL in fifth year and we know he got at least an E in Transfigurations. Just because Harry got an E doesn't mean an O is out of reach for other students. Many probably thought Harry and Ron were complete dunces in Potions and they got Es (proving them wrong too). Ronin: But, I believe that it's got Harry thinking about things and it may just take time to sink in. They are pretty advanced theories and I think, like apparation, he'll make his splinches before it finally gets through. Magpie: Even without the Potions stuff he does learn a lot of spells. Ronin: On the matter of Harry taking credit for the theories, I can see that some people might consider this poor behavior. Personally, I don't. I think he made an attempt, but it was brushed off by Slughorn. Why press the issue? Magpie: Yes, I don't think it's such an awful thing. Harry is always aware that Slughorn's descriptions of him are inaccurate, but it doesn't seem to go much beyond Slughorn in class. If I had that situation I can imagine years later laughing over it and telling stories about it, how I had this one teacher who was convinced I was good at certain aspects of a class when I had no clue. But of course Harry is also very aware of the lie he's living, even if it's a small one. Alla: I already said that I agree with you on that, yes, I just don't agree that Harry is a mediocre student, but that has nothing to do with cheating. Magpie: Did I call him mediocre? (Honestly don't remember!) I think by definition *no one* in the Potions class is mediocre. They all had to have gotten at least an E on their OWLS, and that's above average. And Harry's never been bad at Potions, that I remember. In this class he probably is starting out near the bottom with an E instead of an O, but I don't think that's enough to make him mediocre. It's a hard class for everyone. -m From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 05:12:08 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 05:12:08 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheating at Potions (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165241 Mike: Looking for a place to plug into this thread. This seems as good as any. :: Reaches for his old AF Academy Yearbook to look up who was his honor rep :: I to went to a college that had an Honor Code. One of the adjuncts of that code required each of us to purchase new textbooks for every class. This was so none of us could get an unfair advantage via a used book with notes, highlighting, etc. Yet, it was perfectly fair for us to consult notes from previous students. There was even a cadet academic advisor, in each cadet squadron, who had a storehouse of old notes that anyone was free to access. This disparrate attitude towards the cheating part of the code always confused me. And yet, I challenge anyone to find an institution with a stricter code of conduct or more strident approach to same than the service academies. :: Mike plucks a hair from his head and gets out his sharp knife :: I bring this up to point out that even the strictest institutions have a hard time defining "cheating". Hogwarts does not have an honor code. It is clear in canon that any student can chose to buy a used school book. I don't think any of the Weasleys had a new book. (Except, of course, in Lockhart's year when there were none available) So the fact that Harry got a better used book than anyone else, in and of itself, does not constitute cheating. Ron got a used book from the same cupboard, was he cheating? What if Ron's had additional notes that proved to be worse than the text's instructions, would Ron be cheating if he used those notes? Or is it only if your book has notes that improve your performance are you considered a cheater? IOW, just because Harry's used book was more useful than Ron's does not make Harry a cheater. And it is clearly legal for Harry or anybody to have a used book. [Quick aside here; does anybody besides me think that Snape continued to mark up that book well after his school days? When Harry makes the comment that he "Shouldn't have left his old book in the bottom of that cupboard", I immediately thought, 'that's cause he continued to use it'. I speculate that Snape made most of his potions improvements post school days. Just a feeling ;-)] Is Harry disengenuous by not coming clean to Slughorn? In a perfect world, which Hogwarts clearly is not, sure Harry could have fessed up. Let me ask this in a different way. What's Harry's motivation to reveal his sudden potions brilliance? Besides telling Hermione and Ron, of course. Altruism? He tried to share with Hermione and Ron, it didn't work. Should he stand up in class and announce that his text book has notes which improve on the standard text? Make copies of his book and distribute them to all the other kids in class? What course of action would appeal to our senses while not usurping Slughorn's authority? Remember, Slughorn assigned that text book, especially if you position yourself with those that consider the assigned text as inferior. I suppose one could say that the honorable thing would be for Harry to turn in the HBP's copy and proceed with his new book from Flourish and Blotts. I'm not one that agrees that this is either required or reasonable to satisfy my sensibilities. Others mileage may vary. I just don't see Harry as cheating by using this book. BTW, when did we allow Snape's opinion to become our moral compass? Has anyone else accused Harry of being a cheat besides Snape? I agree with Neri, not even Hermione accuses Harry of cheating. Why do we? On Snape's word? Of course Snape doesn't have an axe to grind, does he? Speaking of Hermione , I didn't notice her having a problem with helping out the boys herself. In fact, doesn't she help both Harry and Neville in *Potions*? Doesn't she as much as finish both Ron's and Harry's homework many times throughout the series? Why is it that only now, when Harry has someone (or something) else to help him that she gets indignant about Harry getting help? Or could it possibly be that Hermione just doesn't like Harry outperforming her in class? And she hasn't exactly been the shining moralistic visage in HBP, has she? Hermione is quick to point out an injustice when it's against her, but not so quick to practice what she preaches. Although an aptitude in potions is undoubtedly an asset if not a downright requirement to be an Auror, I'm hesitant to assign the same need in the upcoming battle with Voldemort. And though Harry doesn't seem to be grasping the principles of potion making, maybe all he would need as a prospective Auror is a good guide. He does know where he can get that. Maybe that's good enough. I'm doubting any need as an Auror to pull up in the hinterland during a hot pursuit and have to brew up some antidote. Ingredients might be scarce. :-) But if he could carry around a portable kit that also contained several instructions particular to the ingredients available ... maybe that'll work?! **************************************************************** On to a few responses. > Betsy Hp: > But if you learn a chess move from the book, get praised for it, > and give the impression that you made that move up yourself, you're > a liar at the very least. Which is why Harry felt guilty about > passing the Prince's knowledge off as his own, and why he justified > himself by tying it in with saving the world. Mike: Well ... sure if you lie you're a liar. But a chess analogy is difficult to accomplish, since the chess pieces move the same for everyone. But potion ingredients and brewing method aren't the same for everyone. More to the point, when do you feel Harry lied to someone about using the "Prince's" methods. I'm gonna put a caveat on you here . You can't use lying by ommission, because that presupposes that Harry has a duty to disclose his use of the book's notes. I'm asking where does Harry out and out lie about coming up with these innovations himself. The closest I think he comes is after Sluggy praises Harry's Elixor to Induce Euphoria with another of his Lily's genes references. Harry doesn't correct him, he just says something like 'yeah, I suppose'. This is a close one. But since I don't think Harry is cheating by using the Prince's book, I'm gonna give him a pass here. You may not. > > >>Ronin: > > I don't think Harry was cheating at all. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Why, then, does Harry feel guilty? Mike: Ahh, the guilt complex. A couple of points: After that first day when he won the Felix, I think Harry stopped feeling guilty about the Prince's help. Secondly, it seems Harry only feels a twinge of guilt towards Hermione. I'm not sure that isn't out of loyalty as well as him remembering all those times Hermione helped him. He is also well aware that Hermione is a better student than him and that could contribute to his feeling that he has somehow betrayed her by beating her. Not sure if that made sense :-/ Can I ask one more question: Do you and if so why do you think Harry should feel guilty? Cause I don't think he should. He wasn't cheating by Hogwarts rules and I don't think he lied to anyone but Snape, post- Draco-slicing. Mike, finally finishing this post, gotta learn to type faster :( From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Wed Feb 21 07:42:02 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 07:42:02 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165242 People say Harry cheated in potions, but nobody can point to a rule he violated. There is certainly no rule saying you can only use your textbook to complete your studies, otherwise Hogwarts wouldn't have a library. Harry didn't lie, he never told Slughorn "I was only reading the standard textbook". Harry not only followed the letter of the law he followed the spirit of the law too. He found a way to do things that was better than that idiotic textbook and he ran with it. Good for him! Well OK, Harry did lie to Snape about the book, but Snape is the enemy and you should never EVER tell the truth to the enemy as they may be able to turn it to their advantage. Better to confuse the bastards with garbage information. If I were Harry I would have absolutely no moral qualms in lying to Snape about anything and everything, absolutely positively no guilt at all. In fact it might be fun. I'm sure Harry feels the SOB doesn't deserve the truth. Besides, being a convincing liar is a useful skill to have, but Harry isn't very good at it, he needs practice. Who better to practice on than Snape? I sure hope I don't hear people responding to this and say Harry must never lie; this is a war and Harry is in the thick of it, he'll be lucky if he doesn't have to start disemboweling people. It's in the nature of war and it makes a thing like telling a fib to a pig like Snape seem like small potatoes. Eggplant From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed Feb 21 07:57:10 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:57:10 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40702202357j132ad111r6b3c81ad8ce343fc@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165243 > eggplant wrote: > > People say Harry cheated in potions, but nobody can point to a rule he > violated. There is certainly no rule saying you can only use your > textbook to complete your studies, otherwise Hogwarts wouldn't have a > library. Harry didn't lie, he never told Slughorn "I was only reading > the standard textbook". Harry not only followed the letter of the law > he followed the spirit of the law too. He found a way to do things > that was better than that idiotic textbook and he ran with it. Good > for him! > Kemper now: If you sleep with someone else and don't tell your spouse. And your spouse doesn't ask if you slept with anyone else. You broke vows and your marriage is a lie whether your spouse knows it or not, you're still a cheat. I personally don't care that Harry lied by omission to Slughorn or lied directly to Snape; but I know that he cheated. Kemper From mros at xs4all.nl Wed Feb 21 08:46:41 2007 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 09:46:41 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] On lying and cheating References: Message-ID: <000901c75594$ceee4130$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 165244 Eggplant: >>>People say Harry cheated in potions, but nobody can point to a rule he violated.<<< Marion: In that case, neither is Lockhart a cheat. Lockhart took the accomplishments and achievements of other wizards and presented them to the world as his own so he could reap admiration, praise and financial gain (in the form of his books) Harry took the accomplishments and achievements of another wizard and presented them to the world as his own so he could reap the praise of his teacher and win the Felix potion in a contest. You need a written in stone rule here? Okay, according to the rules of my university it is absolutely forbidden, on pain of expulsion out of the course to copy answers from a fellow student and giving them to the professor claiming they are your own work. I'm the TA of a course called History of Science at the University of Leiden and yes, putting in work that is thought out by somebody else is forbidden. If somebody would say, "I found these notes and I want to work with them, proving them wright or wrong", that's another question; he or she would *work* with the data, but if he or she were just copying them without even understanding them, that would be a definite violation of a *written down rule*. Eggplant >>>Well OK, Harry did lie to Snape about the book, but Snape is the enemy and you should never EVER tell the truth to the enemy as they may be able to turn it to their advantage.<<< Marion: Snape is not 'the enemy', Snape is a teacher. In the war against Voldemort he is even an ally. Would this mean that if Slughorn had discovered the potionsbook, Harry would blithely have admitted to cheating all year long? Because Slughorn isn't the enemy? Or are in your view all teachers 'the enemy'? Eggplant >>> Better to confuse the bastards with garbage information. Marion Ah, plural. All teachers are enemies. Marion >> If I were Harry I would have absolutely no moral qualms in lying to Snape about anything and everything, absolutely positively no guilt at all. In fact it might be fun. I'm sure Harry feels the SOB doesn't deserve the truth. Besides, being a convincing liar is a useful skill to have, but Harry isn't very good at it, he needs practice. Who better to practice on than Snape? Marion Ah, nothing better to hide one own's dastardly deeds such as lying and cheating as to claim to be morally better than the one your lying to. I'm sure the DE's have a same kind of philosophy (or really not so much a philosopy as a feeble excuse): "Yes, I occasionally murder people, but since I'm so much more better than them in any way, and since they are the enemy, I'm entitled to murder them. What better people to hone my murderous skills on than SOB's like those loser muggles?" Eggplant: >>>I sure hope I don't hear people responding to this and say Harry must never lie; this is a war and Harry is in the thick of it,<<< Marion Ah, yes, the war excuse. Strange. When people claimed that maybe (very possibly) Snape and Dumbledore were in some kind of 'suicide pact' (if Snape's position were compromised Dumbledore sacrificed himself and vice versa) which is very plausible given the fact that Dumbledore is a war leader and Snape was his righthand man, his spy in the enemy camp and his crony whom he absolutely trusted, when people claim that Snape's AKing DD is an act of war, lots of people don't buy it. "It's murder!", they yell, "Murder is murder no matter what!". Strangely enough, these same people claim that the cheating in class by a student is somehow an 'act of war' (how exactly is Harry going to defeat Voldemort with his amazing ability to cheat in class, pray tell me) and when a vindictive girl disfigures the face of another girl its somehow reminiscend of appraisals by the French resistance! However, Harry did not lie and cheat to defeat Voldemort, he lied and cheated because he wanted an unfair advantage in class, because he was to lazy and too untalented to do the work on his own and because he got away with it. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Wed Feb 21 10:18:24 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 10:18:24 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: <000901c75594$ceee4130$63fe54d5@Marion> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165245 "Marion Ros" wrote: > in that case, neither is Lockhart a cheat. Lockhart claimed to have done all sorts of wonderful things that he had in fact not done. Harry never claimed anything like that, in fact he never claimed anything at all, he simply produced potions when asked to do so. > according to the rules of my university it is absolutely > forbidden, on pain of expulsion out of the course to > copy answers from a fellow student and giving them to > the professor claiming they are your own work. Harry wasn't copying answers, he was following alternate instructions that he thought were superior to the ones found in that stupid text book, and that is more than not wrong,IT IS COMMENDABLE! A requirement to stick to that ridiculous textbook is a recipe for stagnation. I congratulate Harry for upsetting the apple cart, it's about time. > I'm the TA of a course called History of Science at > the University of Leiden and yes, putting in work > that is thought out by somebody else is forbidden. GOOD GOD ALMIGHTY! If that is really true, and I find it difficult to believe it is, and if you're really not allowed to build onto the accomplishments of others then your course must stink to high heaven! > if he or she were just copying them without > even understanding them Snape had a deep understanding of why potions work the way they do, but nobody in Slughorn's class did, not even Hermione. Nevertheless if Harry can make any potion desired then that is a skill not to be scoffed at even if he doesn't understand why they work as they do. > Snape is not 'the enemy', Snape is a teacher. > In the war against Voldemort he is even an ally. Maybe yes maybe no, we will have to wait until July 21 to know for sure, but I can tell you one thing right now. If I were in Harry's position near the end of book 6 I would hate Snape almost as much as I hate Voldemort. And after Snape murdered Dumbledore you can remove the word "almost". Regardless of what JKR has in mind for the character from all that Harry has learned about the man in 6 years he would be a FOOL to treat Snape as anything other than the enemy. > he [Harry] lied and cheated because he wanted an unfair > advantage in class What lie did he make? Who did he cheat? What is unfair in finding a better way to do things when you never claimed to be the inventor of those ways? Eggplant From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed Feb 21 12:02:19 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:02:19 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheating at Potions (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165246 Mike: > Ron got a used book from the same cupboard, was he cheating? What if Ron's had additional notes that proved to be worse than the text's instructions, would Ron be cheating if he used those notes? Or is it only if your book has notes that improve your performance are you considered a cheater? IOW, just because Harry's used book was more useful than Ron's does not make Harry a cheater. And it is clearly legal for Harry or anybody to have a used book. Ceridwen: The Ron example you give is the ideal reason why a student shouldn't use notes in a used book. This was illustrated nicely by the spells in the HBP's book. User-friendly, funny spells, then, Sectum Sempra. Of course Ron would be cheating if he used those notes! The only difference between Ron's hypothetical notes and Harry's actual notes is that Ron would reap the punishment from using them immediately. Harry reaped the punishment months later, after he hid the Prince's book and had to use an ordinary textbook. As others have pointed out, he didn't understand why the improvements worked. If he would have used the notes, explored why they worked, and learned something from them, then I would be much less inclined to say he outright and shamelessly cheated. Though, thinking about it, why would notes in a NEWT-level Potions class be worse than the book? I understand this is a hypothetical situation that could apply to any year, but the tangent part of me is suddenly hung up on this. In fact, why would notes in any book be worse than the printed instructions? Who would be crazy enough to annotate detrimentally? Filling out the answers in the post-chapter questions wrongly, sure, I can see that. But, notes in the text itself? Sorry, back on track now. *g* Mike: > [Quick aside here; does anybody besides me think that Snape continued to mark up that book well after his school days? When Harry makes the comment that he "Shouldn't have left his old book in the bottom of that cupboard", I immediately thought, 'that's cause he continued to use it'. I speculate that Snape made most of his potions improvements post school days. Just a feeling ;-)] Ceridwen: There's been a lot of speculation about why Harry got Snape's old book as a loaner. Dumbledore's influence is a big one. I suppose it's possible that Snape might have continued to use the book, but then, why didn't Harry, Ron or Hermione recognize Adult!Snape's writing? And, why wouldn't Adult!Snape have his own notebook to make corrections? A clean piece of parchment, with the original potion spelled onto it so he wouldn't even have to copy it out, spaced wide enough for easily-readable notes, instead of using his old sixth-year text, would make more sense to me. The notebook would also have a record of all attempts to improve the potions, with notes about why this worked and that didn't, and negative effects from any attempt. I would also say that, since Snape left Hogwarts before Slughorn retired, then why didn't some other student benefit from, and keep, the Prince's book, long before Harry entered school? Though, I am guessing that you suppose that Snape kept his book for further improvements, and it only got into the cupboard after he became a teacher. But if that's so, then why did Snape put the book into the used book cupboard? Since he only accepted O students, no student would be surprised to be going to his classes after getting an E. Why was there a loaner cupboard to begin with? Hogwarts impresses me as a school that expects its students to bring all materials to class. And since they live in the school, it isn't difficult to run up to the dorm to retrieve a forgotten book. The question still comes down to, within the plot, how did Harry out of all the students who have gone to Hogwarts since Snape's sixth year, end up with the HBP's book? Mike: > Is Harry disengenuous by not coming clean to Slughorn? In a perfect world, which Hogwarts clearly is not, sure Harry could have fessed up. Let me ask this in a different way. What's Harry's motivation to reveal his sudden potions brilliance? Besides telling Hermione and Ron, of course. Altruism? He tried to share with Hermione and Ron, it didn't work. Should he stand up in class and announce that his text book has notes which improve on the standard text? Make copies of his book and distribute them to all the other kids in class? What course of action would appeal to our senses while not usurping Slughorn's authority? Remember, Slughorn assigned that text book, especially if you position yourself with those that consider the assigned text as inferior. Ceridwen: Yes, I think that Harry was disingenuous by not coming clean to Slughorn. I don't think he's disingenuous for not coming clean to the entire class. It isn't the rest of the class's business, until he continues to benefit from the notes to their disadvantage. Even then, no full explanation, from Harry or Slughorn, is necessary. In my opinion, of course. If he had admitted to Slughorn from the beginning that he wasn't some Potions prodigy, he might have been able to benefit from the Prince's notes on a more practical level. Why does this work and that doesn't? Slughorn could guide him. He apparently knows why the improvements work. The sprig of peppermint allaying nose tweaking was Slughorn's explanation, not Harry's. By not challenging Slughorn's authority through his choice of book outright in class, then Slughorn's authority would not be in danger, presuming the danger is to Slughorn's reputation with his class as a whole. Harry obviously sees that the assigned text is flawed. I'm surprised that Hermione didn't make more of a big deal about that, frankly. Neri has mentioned that a professor with a student in this situation would be pleased that the student was using improvements. If Harry went to Slughorn and told him that he had these great notes and needed some help in understanding them, Slughorn would probably have been pleased. He likes to think of himself as useful to up-and- comers, and he seems to like teaching. Both of his pleasures would be engaged. He could earn some obligation from Harry, and he could get into the intricacies of the peppermint and whatnot with a student who is both an up-and-comer, and willing to learn. Does Slughorn have much choice in textbooks? Or is this book the only one, or heaven forbid, the best one, available for sixth-year Potions students? There are a lot of unanswered questions here. Mike: > Speaking of Hermione , I didn't notice her having a problem with helping out the boys herself. In fact, doesn't she help both Harry and Neville in *Potions*? Doesn't she as much as finish both Ron's and Harry's homework many times throughout the series? Why is it that only now, when Harry has someone (or something) else to help him that she gets indignant about Harry getting help? Or could it possibly be that Hermione just doesn't like Harry outperforming her in class? And she hasn't exactly been the shining moralistic visage in HBP, has she? Hermione is quick to point out an injustice when it's against her, but not so quick to practice what she preaches. Ceridwen: Hee! Actually, Hermione has been criticized on this list for correcting, or doing, Ron's and Harry's homework instead of merely *helping* with their homework. The usual complaint is that the boys aren't learning anything if Hermione does the work for them, which is true. Just as true as the Prince doing Harry's thinking for him in Potions. So, this isn't just a sixth-year thing that happened because Harry got a good loaner book. He's been benefitting from someone else's work since first year, along with Ron. (Of course, Harry and Ron had to do some of their own work, since Hermione had to have time to do her own, too. Still, she looks over their homework and makes (or suggests) corrections. They had to have absorbed something or neither would have ended up with Es in Potions.) Which brings it down to a whole 'nother level. Harry's upbringing was not what it should have been. I can't see the Dursleys pushing ethics on their unwanted nephew. Harry started Hogwarts not knowing that he shouldn't take opportunity when it presents itself in an academic setting, since he doesn't learn from someone else doing his work. Or, he doesn't do as well as he could have with someone else doing his work. Harry has never learned not to let someone else do it if it's difficult for him. Mike: > Although an aptitude in potions is undoubtedly an asset if not a downright requirement to be an Auror... Ceridwen: It's a requirement. Or, advanced Potions classes are a requirement. Mike: > ...I'm hesitant to assign the same need in the upcoming battle with Voldemort. Ceridwen: Same here. I can't imagine that the Fate of the Wizarding World (TM) rests on a Potions cook-off between Harry and Voldie. I mean, who gets the Chief Cook apron, and who gets the Bottle-Washer apron? Mike: > And though Harry doesn't seem to be grasping the principles of potion making, maybe all he would need as a prospective Auror is a good guide. He does know where he can get that. Maybe that's good enough. I'm doubting any need as an Auror to pull up in the hinterland during a hot pursuit and have to brew up some antidote. Ingredients might be scarce. :-) But if he could carry around a portable kit that also contained several instructions particular to the ingredients available ... maybe that'll work?! Ceridwen: The problem with that is, situations may arise when an Auror might need to make an antidote on the fly, without the time it takes to read notes about ingredients. An Auror might also find himself or herself in the position of not having such a kit at all and have to make an antidote from what is available. A solid grounding in Potions would be necessary at such times, not an ability to read and follow directions. The MoM has a requirement, and I presume the requirement is there for practical reasons. They've had years to hone the requirements, and this is one that has stayed. Mike: > More to the point, when do you feel Harry lied to someone about using the "Prince's" methods. I'm gonna put a caveat on you here . You can't use lying by ommission, because that presupposes that Harry has a duty to disclose his use of the book's notes. Ceridwen: My name's not Betsy. So, no caveat. I presuppose that Harry has a duty to disclose, *to Slughorn*, that he is using these notes. I presuppose this because he won't get the instruction he needs to understand the notes and why the improvements are improvements, if he doesn't disclose, to someone knowledgeable, that he is using these notes. I also presuppose that Harry should tell Slughorn because Slughorn is the one making wrong assumptions. I'm interested in Harry's full development as our Future Hero, not in his passing sixth-year Potions. So, yes, he is lying by omission. But that isn't why he got detention. He lied about his book to Snape, and he lied about his nick-name (yeah, Harry's known to his closest friends as Roonil Waslib, and Ron is Hoopy Popper), and he lied about where he found the Sectum Sempra spell. Which leads the tangential in me to wonder, did Snape only note Sectum Sempra in this one book? Did he not teach it to anyone else? This is the spell that breaks it for Snape, and he uses Legilimency to see the book in Harry's mind. Is Harry the only other person in the entire WW who knows Sectum Sempra? Ceridwen. From miamibarb at BellSouth.net Wed Feb 21 12:08:08 2007 From: miamibarb at BellSouth.net (Barb Roberts) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 07:08:08 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Harry cheating at Potions (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <12b3390e0f1f2445cf3f660c504e720c@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165247 Unfair advantage from highlighting, notes? Uh...perhaps because of the rule at your school had, you haven't seen many used textbooks. Having gone to a school (major US state university) that actually facilitated the used textbook trade, I can vouch that many of the marks, notes, etc. are counterproductive. (You wouldn't believe the number of students who do not highlight the central points.) Students using used texts need to be savvier than ones who have new texts. Relying on some of texts that I've seen would most likely result in a situation that is the academic equivalent to Harry's sectumsempra spell. Caveat emptor. > Mike: > ... I to went to a college that had an Honor Code. suppose> > One of the adjuncts of that code required each of us to purchase new > textbooks for every class. This was so > none of us could get an unfair advantage via a used book with notes, > highlighting, etc... > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From muellem at bc.edu Wed Feb 21 12:44:06 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:44:06 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165248 "eggplant107" wrote: > > > Well OK, Harry did lie to Snape about the book, but Snape is the enemy > and you should never EVER tell the truth to the enemy as they may be > able to turn it to their advantage. Better to confuse the bastards > with garbage information. If I were Harry I would have absolutely no > moral qualms in lying to Snape about anything and everything, > absolutely positively no guilt at all. In fact it might be fun. I'm > sure Harry feels the SOB doesn't deserve the truth. Besides, being a > convincing liar is a useful skill to have, but Harry isn't very good > at it, he needs practice. Who better to practice on than Snape? colebiancardi: well, at this point in the book, Snape is not the enemy (and in my opinion, never is the enemy) - he is trusted by Dumbledore. So, that is not the reason why Harry lied to him. Harry lied because he knew that Snape would take the book away and Harry didn't want that. Harry knew that his use of the book, even though there may not be any *written* rules on it, was on the line of dishonesty. If it wasn't, why hide the book? Why be afraid that Snape would take it away? Snape's comments to Harry about being a liar & cheat were, IMHO, personal. Snape knew that Harry had the book and the book was Snape's as a teen. He knew that Harry was using his notes to gain the new title of a Potions natural & genuis. That is why Snape called him that - he knew about the book, he knew the real author of the notes and he knew that Harry was trying to pass them off as his own. colebiancardi From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 21 13:26:02 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 08:26:02 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: <700201d40702202357j132ad111r6b3c81ad8ce343fc@mail.gmail.com> References: <700201d40702202357j132ad111r6b3c81ad8ce343fc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002801c755bb$d94c4c90$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165249 --Kemper Wrote-- >>>If you sleep with someone else and don't tell your spouse. And your spouse doesn't ask if you slept with anyone else. You broke vows and your marriage is a lie whether your spouse knows it or not, you're still a cheat. I personally don't care that Harry lied by omission to Slughorn or lied directly to Snape; but I know that he cheated.<<< --Ronin-s Comments-- Okay....Apples, meet oranges. Broken wedding vows are not the same thing at all. Not even close. As far as I know, none of the Hogwarts students ever took any solemn vows concerning their potions textbooks. The reason that no vow was taken is probably because it doesn't matter if they manage to learn from someone else's notes in their textbooks. Furthermore, if Harry had not learned what he did from the Prince's notes, Ron would be dead! Thank God, Harry learned about bezoars. I don't care if Harry did lie to Slughorn or Snape either. Considering the two, Slughorn altered his own memories trying to cover up the truth and Snape is definitely lying to someone. Either Lord Voldemort or Dumbledore. And Dumbledore himself lied by omission for years if we want to get technical. He waited until Sirius's death to tell Harry about the prophecy and everything. These are the examples that Harry has to model himself after. And in times of war, all is fair. Cheers, Ronin _____ From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kemper Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 2:57 AM To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [HPforGrownups] On lying and cheating > eggplant wrote: > > People say Harry cheated in potions, but nobody can point to a rule he > violated. There is certainly no rule saying you can only use your > textbook to complete your studies, otherwise Hogwarts wouldn't have a > library. Harry didn't lie, he never told Slughorn "I was only reading > the standard textbook". Harry not only followed the letter of the law > he followed the spirit of the law too. He found a way to do things > that was better than that idiotic textbook and he ran with it. Good > for him! > Kemper now: If you sleep with someone else and don't tell your spouse. And your spouse doesn't ask if you slept with anyone else. You broke vows and your marriage is a lie whether your spouse knows it or not, you're still a cheat. I personally don't care that Harry lied by omission to Slughorn or lied directly to Snape; but I know that he cheated. Kemper [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From funkeginger at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 09:54:40 2007 From: funkeginger at yahoo.com (funkeginger) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 09:54:40 -0000 Subject: Do you think that Harry found the Half Blood Prince book for a reason Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165250 I think that the book and the spell he learned from it will play an important role in the Deathly Hallow as far as fighting You Know Who goes. Harry does not know very many spells. He can't really fight You Know Who at his full strength with those little Jinxes he uses and The disarming spell. He needs something powerful on his side to win against You Know Who like that spell he used on Malfoy in the Bathroom . I am not saying it was good to use that spell on him, I am just saying it was a pretty cool move. He needs stuff like that to take on You Know Who. He can't just rely on Hermione's Knowlege to help him through to the very end. Harry has skills above even full grown Wizards but he need someone to train him who is Advanced. That would have been Dumbledore or Sirius or Snape. But two are dead and one is bad so the kid needs some help and I think he could us some of the Half Prince spells for fighting. Yeah Snape's bad but he was a really Advanced Wizard and maybe the book might have somthing that Harry can use. So this is why I think the book was meant for Harry for a reason. funkeginger From funkeginger at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 08:21:03 2007 From: funkeginger at yahoo.com (ginger mabayoje) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 00:21:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Was Harry cheating in Potions in HBP WAS: Re: Bathroom Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20070221082103.60686.qmail@web37012.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165251 I don't think that people should look at HP too hardly for cheating in book six. I know when I was his age I would have done the same thing. Also I think that Harry was meant to find that book. I think it will play a big role in V undoing. Because Harry really does not have much up his sleeves for fighting You Know Who other than the disarming spell he learned in year 2. I think that spell he used on Malfoy in the bath room is the only chance he has. Harry can't use a killing curse. So in the end I don't think it matters that much if he cheated using the book but the fact how the book can help him bring down You Know Who. So think about that (Do you think that the Deathly Hallows is really the last book? I just think she using it as a Marketing scheme. There is too much to do in for it to be the last book. He has to find at least four Horcruxes and he has to kill V and find out who RAB is and we have to see what happen to him after school). funkeginger From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 21 14:24:53 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 09:24:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Harry cheating at Potions (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: References: <002701c7554a$366e7d20$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: <003401c755c4$12f18e80$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165252 --Betsy HP Wrote-- >>> I don't think Hermione has this sort of power over Harry. She's never been able to make him feel guilty about something Harry felt he was right about before. Usually when Hermione does her guilt routine and Harry doesn't think she's in the right, he's annoyed by her. So Harry's guilt, IMO, point to something he's feeling all by himself. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- How he reacts and how he feels are two different stories. You can't honestly tell me that making Hermione upset (One of his two best friends in the world), doesn't make him feel guilty. She has made him feel guilty about one thing or another every year and he's learned to deal with it a lot better, but that doesn't mean he doesn't still feel guilty about it. Just as in SS/PS, Hermione made Harry and Ron feel guilty for being annoyed by her being a know-it-all, which almost got them all killed when they rescued her from the troll. --Betsy HP Wrote-- >>>Yes, but Harry was hopeless. He didn't even know how to start. Everyone struggled, but they were *doing* something. The Prince didn't cover that particular area because he had nothing to add, so Harry didn't study it. That's the crutch problem. He's relying on the Prince to do *all* of his thinking. Does he get something good out of it? Sure! But he's also got a bit too dependent. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- Nobody knew how to start, other than Hermione. She and Slughorn were the only two in the class who understood Golpalott's Third Law. The Prince himself was annoyed by it's complication and just noted, "Just shove a bezoar down their throats". (Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince - 1st American Hardcover Edition, Pg. 377) Also, on the page before it says specifically that none of the students even realized Slughorn had finished talking until Hermione was half way through gathering her potions ingredients from the cabinets. Then everyone starts haphazardly attempts at making their antidotes. It's not always a good idea to DO SOMETHING, when you have no idea what you are doing. This can get you killed. Like, cleaning a loaded gun, you don't just jump in and start "doing something" for the sake of doing something! He may have been dependent upon the notes, but no more than the others were dependent upon Golpalott's Third Law. He just had better luck. And he learned a much better and quicker solution to MOST poisons. --Betsy HP Wrote-- >>>I think he cheated during the contest for the Felix. Harry had a cheat sheet the other students didn't have. And he's been lying the entire year. I'm not saying we need to hang him. But he's not been behaving with total nobility. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- I don't think this is cheating at all. Cheating is when you use somebody else's answers without doing anything. Cheating is when Hermione confounded McLaggen to help Ron get on the Quiditch team. What Harry did was use the textbook and the note to achieve a much more efficient method. The notes did not create the potion themselves. Harry had to crush the ingredients and stir them, just as everyone had to do following instructions that were written for them by someone else. And he didn't know if it would even work. He took a chance with the notes and it payed off. It could've been a total disaster. So, he had no idea it would help him win the Felix Filicus. His intention was to make a passable potion. Someone compared Harry to Gilderoy Lockhart. They are not even similar in my opinion. Lockhart wrote books and gained wealth and fame from other people's experiences. Then he proceeded to erase their memories so they wouldn't talk. Harry used someone's notes in a school provided textbook and learned a few spells and antidotes. He never erased anyone's memory or gave credit (Probably because in part, he didn't know who the Prince was) and he certainly never gained fame or wealth for it. Several of his classmates knew where he'd learned the potions tips and he wasn't keeping it a secret so that he could claim fame and put his name on them. Also, as I've said before, he did not get the answers to potions all year. He learned from someone else's method and physically performed that method to achieve the desired results. He merely followed an improved set of instructions. If anything, the textbooks should all be upgraded to reflect these methods because it's a disgrace that the school has been using such outdated text for decades. That is inexcusable. As far as Harry behaving with nobility.....He's a school boy, not the Prime Minister. Between saving the WW each year, dealing with death, dementors, occlumencey, quiditch and lessons, I think he's demonstrated exceptional nobility so far and is entitled to make mistakes occasionally. Even though I don't consider using the Prince's notes a mistake or a dishonor in any way. If I were going to argue for lack of nobility (or more appropriately, bad judgment) I'd use the example of him casting spells on people when he didn't know what effect they would have. This was reckless and careless and he's lucky he didn't kill someone. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From desafio6 at gmail.com Wed Feb 21 14:58:13 2007 From: desafio6 at gmail.com (Leticia Chen) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 09:58:13 -0500 Subject: Do you think that Harry found the Half Blood Prince book for a reason In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4641ef6a0702210658h4fb5e314t6191a0100456e1fe@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165253 On 2/21/07, funkeginger wrote: > > I think that the book and the spell he learned from it will play an > important role in the Deathly Hallow as far as fighting You Know Who > goes. Harry does not know very many spells. He can't really fight > You Know Who at his full strength with those little Jinxes he uses > and The disarming spell. > He needs something powerful on his side to win against You Know Who > like that spell he used on Malfoy in the Bathroom . I agree with you Funkeginger. If Harry wouldn't follow what the Prince wrote on the book, he would have never won the bottle of Felix and in turn would have had a harder time getting the memory out Slughorn and saving the life of his fellow DA members and OotP members that where fighting on the tower. According to Ginny she says that one of DE was throwing Jinxes left and right and somehow they didn't get hit by any and the only person seriously hurt was Bill and he was attacked by Greyback. I think even Neville didn't have such a bad injury. I think the book came to him in the nick of time for the rest of the story to unfold the way it did. I hope some of it will help him with LV in the end. Letty -- Letty www.szuletcreations.com http://desafio.multiply.com/ From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Feb 21 15:44:30 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:44:30 -0000 Subject: Voldermort learning the prophecy? In-Reply-To: <948bbb470702201147p303add02td29fd140b833474f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165254 SSSusan: > I'm not sure quite WHY I don't think we're going to see a return to > his quest to get his hands on the prophecy, but I just don't "feel" > it coming. (Not that that means much that *I'm* not feeling a > premonition, heh.) Maybe it's just the way JKR dropped the whole > thing for the entire 6th book? Maybe it's that I can't imagine how > he wouldn't figure it all out (that it's about Love) if he does hear > it. Maybe it's that we have -- JKR has caused us to -- switched our > focus towards those horcruxes and wondering so much about how that's > all going to play out. Jen: JKR does have a pattern of dropping plotlines when they've served their purpose so that's a very real possibility. I tend to think like houyhnhnm though, that Voldemort might believe there's something in the prophecy to help him understand how to destroy Harry (not knowing what IS in there). houyhnhnm: > I can't even remember if we heard directly or indirectly from > Voldemort that he *knew* there was more to the prophecy, or > if we are just assuming he did from Dumbledore's words to Harry. > (And neither do I think we can *assume* that he knew about > Trelawney.) Jen: I'm making assumptions to believe both things are true, but my assumptions are based on organizing canon according to how certain characters reliably act. For example, I don't believe Voldemort would have spent a year attempting to obtain the prophecy if he didn't believe he could gain from hearing the entire thing or possibly, as pointed out by Pippin, he wanted to make certain the information he heard from Snape was true. Either way he didn't complete his mission. Another assumption--LV couldn't possess Harry and this gave him pause enough to start praticing Occlumency, a defensive move not typical of Voldemort strategy. My speculation is he's starting to consider how he'll be able to defeat Harry when all his standard fare isn't working. He was concerned enough about Harry to go after him as a baby and now it must look like his fears are coming true: Harry is a worthy and dangerous opponent who can't be harmed due to a combination of the people around him and something within Harry giving him the ability to defy Voldemort more often than anyone else. I also think it's a safe assumption Snape outed Trelawney as the Seer in question. He did see her, he 'hastened to his master' to tell him what he heard. LV would not overlook the importance of who delivered the prophecy if only to consider whether to hold her hostage in case more were forthcoming. Dumbledore gave Trelawney a post right after the prophecy and I see two reasons for that: 1) She might make another prophecy and he didn't want the first or any future ones to fall into the wrong hands; and 2) if Voldemort learned who delivered the prophecy he might attempt to get more information from her. Like Jeremiah mentioned, the fact that Dumbledore won't permit Trelawney to leave the castle in OOTP tells me he believed her to be at risk from Voldemort. Jeremiah: > Yes, going after her would be a fantastic idea but, as we know from > PoA, she doesn't recall these trance-like-states. Since she > has no memory I would assume it cannot be extracted, since eh has > not "thoughts" about it I would also think you cannot look into her > head and see anything about it. If she is tortured she will be > killed. Sadly, IMO, that is what would happen. LV's attempts to > find out about the prophecy are futile and that is his part of > his quest for power, which is his hubris. Jen: This is exactly why I think whether Voldemort could actually extract the text of prophecy from Trelwaney is a secondary issue. If he believes it possible--and he would since he considers himself all powerful--he would proceed. (Unless JKR has indeed dropped this plotline ). Jen R. From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Feb 21 15:49:28 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:49:28 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheating at Potions (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: <003401c755c4$12f18e80$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165255 > --Betsy HP Wrote-- > > >>>Yes, but Harry was hopeless. He didn't even know how to start. > Everyone struggled, but they were *doing* something. The Prince > didn't cover that particular area because he had nothing to add, so > Harry didn't study it. That's the crutch problem. He's relying on > the Prince to do *all* of his thinking. Does he get something good > out of it? Sure! But he's also got a bit too dependent. > <<< > > > --Ronin's Comments-- > Nobody knew how to start, other than Hermione. She and Slughorn were the > only two in the class who understood Golpalott's Third Law. The Prince > himself was annoyed by it's complication and just noted, "Just shove a > bezoar down their throats". (Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince - 1st > American Hardcover Edition, Pg. 377) > Also, on the page before it says specifically that none of the students even > realized Slughorn had finished talking until Hermione was half way through > gathering her potions ingredients from the cabinets. Then everyone starts > haphazardly attempts at making their antidotes. > It's not always a good idea to DO SOMETHING, when you have no idea what you > are doing. This can get you killed. Like, cleaning a loaded gun, you don't > just jump in and start "doing something" for the sake of doing something! > He may have been dependent upon the notes, but no more than the others were > dependent upon Golpalott's Third Law. He just had better luck. And he > learned a much better and quicker solution to MOST poisons. Magpie: Actually, he'd already learned that. Or should have. Probably most of the kids in the class knew about bezoars. Hermione was quicker than they were on the uptake of GL, but in the end everybody's busily working at understanding the actual law--nobody finishes their Potion. Ron gives up. We don't know about the other students, but it's certainly possible than although they didn't immediately start doing stuff they were figuring out something because they were trying to understand the principles of the law. Harry learns about bezoars, but I don't think that can really be a triumph at this level. It seems like he's basically giving a first-year answer as cheek, which Slughorn finds cute (but might not have depending on the person who did it), but he's not learning anything at NEWT level, which was the point. The other kids may or may not, but it's possible they wound up having a far more productive class Potions- wise than Harry did. > --Ronin's Comments-- > I don't think this is cheating at all. Cheating is when you use somebody > else's answers without doing anything. Cheating is when Hermione confounded > McLaggen to help Ron get on the Quiditch team. What Harry did was use the > textbook and the note to achieve a much more efficient method. The notes did > not create the potion themselves. Harry had to crush the ingredients and > stir them, just as everyone had to do following instructions that were > written for them by someone else. And he didn't know if it would even work. > He took a chance with the notes and it payed off. It could've been a total > disaster. So, he had no idea it would help him win the Felix Filicus. Magpie: Yes, it's not so much that Harry is cheating, since he is following instructions same as everyone else, but that the contest is fixed. There's no way anyone can beat him because their recipes are inferior. Ronin: Harry used someone's notes in a school provided textbook and learned a > few spells and antidotes. He never erased anyone's memory or gave credit > (Probably because in part, he didn't know who the Prince was) and he > certainly never gained fame or wealth for it. Magpie: But he did do that. He gained a repuation with Slughorn as a Potions genius, which I assume is what was being referred to. He benefits from that false reputation with Slughorn. That's where Harry knows perfectly well he's lying by ommission and allowing Slughorn to think he's something that he isn't. Ronin: > As far as Harry behaving with nobility.....He's a school boy, not the Prime > Minister. Between saving the WW each year, dealing with death, dementors, > occlumencey, quiditch and lessons, I think he's demonstrated exceptional > nobility so far and is entitled to make mistakes occasionally. Magpie: Sure--which is why, imo, his mistakes or less than noble intentions don't have to be polished into something else. Harry enjoys having an unfair advantage over the other kids in his class, and finds it more convenient to have Slughorn thinking he's a Potions genius like his mother. -m From jnferr at gmail.com Wed Feb 21 15:52:22 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 09:52:22 -0600 Subject: Half Blood Prince book Message-ID: <8ee758b40702210752o49164a4fn57f5417af96710c7@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165256 montims: something a little different, and I don't think there's anything in canon (if there is, you folks will know!), but it just occurred to me... Harry left the book in the RoR. If Snape had wanted to accio it (and it was his book, so he would have a perfect right) would it have come to him? For that matter, presumably he could have accio'd it at any time if he had become suspicious of Harry's achievements and seen that the book was missing from the cupboard. Couldn't he? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Feb 21 16:10:17 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:10:17 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's entire plan for HBP/DH (Re: Voldemort learning the prophecy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165257 Carol: > I agree that we haven't seen the last of Trelawney (who, IMO, has > one more Prophecy to deliver: these things usually come in threes). > but I don't see how she could have been kidnapped through the > Vanishing Cabinet. That plan was all about getting DEs into > Hogwarts so that Draco could be forced to kill Dumbledore (or die > trying). Trelawney just happened to get in Draco's way (and was > prevented from telling her story to Dumbledore by Harry's reaction > to the eavesdropping revelation). Jen: I won't argue with that part, I just believe there's more going on with Voldemort's plan than we have complete information for yet. We stopped midway and that would be like saying the plot of GOF was for Harry to die in the Triwizard Tournament, or the plot of PS was Snape attempting to steal the Stone. I see more coming and believe Voldemort's plan also includes another attempt to learn the prophecy and/or arranging Snape as the linchpin in his quest to kill Harry. My best guess is both, everything will pull together to take in all three of the factors set in motion in OOTP and HBP: Kill Dumbledore, assure Snape's loyalty for the plan, and obtain the prophecy in order to determine how to defeat Harry. Carol: > I see a plot to kidnap Trelawney, who's no doubt still holed up in > her attic room (her not being mentioned as attending DD's funeral > doesn't mean she wasn't there) as a reason for Voldemort to > infiltrate Hogwarts in DH, along with retrieving any Horcruxes that > might be hidden there or holding any staff or students who happen to > be there hostage. A certain rat Animagus we all know and hate still > knows all the passages into Hogwarts, including one that's blocked > to humans but not to rats and probably is not being watched. Jen: I don't see the need for another plot to kidnap Trelawney when this one was so perfect. The North Tower is on the seventh floor and accesible from the ROR. Trelawney happening to be in or near the ROR when the DE's came in would only be a bonus, requiring much less time to snatch her in all the confusion and before the Cabinents were sealed. I like your addition of Wormtail and would actually guess Pettigrew is already *in* Hogwarts now since he wasn't one of the DE's in the battle. Having him back inside would serve Voldemort's purposes if there's a Horcrux hidden there or he just wants a spy. Trelawney not attending the funeral could either way. Her staying in her room would be consistent with the Trelawney Harry has known for much of the series, if not exactly in OOTP and HBP when she started to venture out more. But the real evidence I see for Trelawney not actually being in the castle at the time of the funeral is another characterization point: Despite whatever grief she may have sincerely felt for the loss of Dumbledore, she would be all over her card reading coming true and want everyone to know about it. She's acutely aware people think her a fraud and now has a star witness in Harry about her very accurate and literal prediction this time. This would wipe the stain off her record and get 'Dobbin' (hehe) out of the castle in her mind, which seem to be her primary concern in HBP. She would *not* pass up this chance imo. Jen, thinking a plan to kidnap Trelawney, arrange for an almost invisible spy at Hogwarts and set up an angry and resentful Snape to help defeat Harry would be a truly evil and vicious plan. From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Feb 21 16:15:00 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:15:00 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165258 > "eggplant107" wrote: > > > > > > > Well OK, Harry did lie to Snape about the book, but Snape is the enemy > > and you should never EVER tell the truth to the enemy as they may be > > able to turn it to their advantage. > colebiancardi: > well, at this point in the book, Snape is not the enemy (and in my > opinion, never is the enemy) - he is trusted by Dumbledore. So, that > is not the reason why Harry lied to him. Harry lied because he knew > that Snape would take the book away and Harry didn't want that. Harry > knew that his use of the book, even though there may not be any > *written* rules on it, was on the line of dishonesty. If it wasn't, > why hide the book? Why be afraid that Snape would take it away? > > Snape's comments to Harry about being a liar & cheat were, IMHO, > personal. Pippin: There's an episode in CoS no one has referred to yet that throws some light on this. When Filch's cat is found petrified, Harry gives a lame account of what he's been up to. Snape suggests that he be banned from Quidditch until he feels inclined to tell the truth. McGonagall protests and Dumbledore backs her up -- there is no evidence that Harry was involved in the attack or is concealing something about it. Harry doesn't tell anyone about the voice in the walls, but he himself isn't sure at this point that it could have anything to do with what happened, or that the adults would believe him if he told them about it. Compare this to the situation after the bathroom attack, in which Harry obviously does know something related to dark activity which he isn't telling. I think Colebiancardi is right -- Snape's remark about being a cheat *is* personal. McGonagall backs Harry's punishment for lying not because he's being a cheat (which she doesn't know) or because she doesn't approve of his defending himself, but because he's withholding evidence. McGonagall isn't the enemy -- there's no reason Harry couldn't have told her about the book if all he feared was that Snape might use it to his advantage. But Harry wanted to keep his edge in potions class, and had to conceal the Prince's interest in Dark Magic to do it. Highly ironic, of course. Pippin From violet_verdi at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 16:17:20 2007 From: violet_verdi at yahoo.com (Violet) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 08:17:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Half Blood Prince book In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702210752o49164a4fn57f5417af96710c7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <933229.30671.qm@web59103.mail.re1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165259 <> Violet here: First of, it wasn?t Snape?s book. Even thought Snape had used it, the book belonged to the school (McGonagall says Harry and Ron can use the school books until their own books arrive). So it wouldn?t been his right to do so. I believe that book passed through many hands before reaching Harry?s. Second of, it wouldn?t help Snape?s case to accio the book seeing as he needed to get Harry with it. By merely summoning the book, he?d only have the book and not a link between the object and Harry. Therefore he wouldn't be able to prove that Harry was using that book to his advantage. But here?s an interesting question: had Snape summoned Harry?s potion book which book would fly into his hand: the one lying in the school library (seeing as Harry merely replaced the cover) or the one that had the HBP?s notes in it? -Violet ~*~ Violet ~*~ "Who knows, maybe a lightening can strike." From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 16:29:21 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:29:21 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165260 Am I crazy or what? (Don't answer!) I've just published an Internet article on gather.com defending Snape. I'm going to copy it here and provide the link, and you can comment on it (kindly, please, even if you don't agree with it!) at either place. (you have to register at gather.com to comment, but it's free and all that.) Here's the article: It's simplistic to think of a character as complex as Snape as "friend" or "foe," as the Border's Books quiz asks readers to do. What matters with regard to the death of Dumbledore is where Snape's loyalties lie, and evidence ranging from Snape's saving Harry's life in Philosopher's Stone to his image in the fake Moody's Foe Glass to his sending the Order to the Ministry of Magic in Order of the Phoenix strongly suggests that he's Dumbledore's man through and through. Nor is "Snape killed Dumbledore; therefore, he's evil" the clinch-all argument that those readers who neglect to look below the surface think it is. For one thing, it's not even certain that the spell Snape cast on the Astronomy Tower was an Avada Kedavra. Other spells, such as the one that injured Tonks in the Department of Mysteries, send out jets of green light like the one the narrator describes coming from Snape's wand in "The Lightning-Struck Tower." Avada Kedavra, in contrast, is described three times in Goblet of Fire, always accompanied with a "blinding flash of green light" and a rushing sound, neither of which is described in relation to Snape's spell. And the Avada Kedavra victims we've seen (notably Cedric Diggory and the Riddles) have died with their eyes open and a surprised or horrified expression. Dumbledore dies with his eyes closed, as if he had time to come to terms with his death, and his "wise old face" looks as if he's asleep, very much like the "peacefully sleeping" portrait in a later chapter. However he died, Dumbledore was neither horrified nor afraid. Snape is quite capable, as we know, of casting nonverbal spells. If anyone could cast a nonverbal spell disguised as an Avada Kedavra, he could. And there's that exchanged glance between two men we know to be Legilimens (Legilimentes?). The brutal-faced Death Eater (Yaxley?) tells Snape that "the boy [Draco] can't do it," meaning that the third provision of the Unbreakable Vow is now in effect. Snape has to "do the deed" or die. At the same time, Dumbledore, who surely knows the terrible choice that Snape is facing, speaks his name softly. They exchange glances, and only then does Snape's expression change to one reflecting emotions remarkably like those Harry felt when he force-fed poison to Dumbledore in the cave. Can Snape's look of hatred reflect self-hatred or, perhaps, fury at Dumbledore for making him keep his promise, foreshadowed by the argument in the forest? Can the revulsion be revulsion at the deed he has to do? Even at this point, Snape doesn't raise his wand. Only when Dumbledore says "Severus, please" (obviously not a cowardly plea to spare his life, whatever it may mean) does Snape lift his wand and speak the words "Avada Kedavra"--not "screaming them into the night" like Wormtail murdering Cedric in the graveyard--simply speaking them. And yet, instead of falling backward with his eyes open, like Cedric and Frank Bryce and (apparently) the Riddles (even the spider simply falls onto its back with its legs in the air), Dumbledore rises into the air and floats "like a rag doll" over the battlements. What kind of Avada Kedavra is this? Is it an Avada Kedavra disguised as something else to allow Dumbledore to die peacefully from the poison as he floats to the ground? Or is it an Avada Kedavra combined with another spell to send him over the battlements and perhaps slow his fall? (He lands oddly sprawled, but there's no indication of broken bones.) Sending Dumbledore over the battlements, surely a deliberate choice on Snape's part, prevents the horrible Fenrir Greyback from having Dumbledore for "afters" and allows Snape to get the Death Eaters and Draco (whom he grabs by the scruff of the neck like a kitten) off the tower and on their way out of Hogwarts. It also prevents Harry, whom Snape surely knows is hiding under the Invisibility Cloak (even Draco saw the two brooms but is not as good as Snape as "putting two and two together"), from rushing out to fight the Death Eaters. By the time that Harry is released from the freezing spell (another hint that Dumbledore didn't die instantly?), the Death Eaters are running down the stairs under Snape's orders. Harry hits one in the back with a Petrificus Totalus, but if he'd fought them in the confined space of the tower, four on one (six on one, in his view), he'd surely have been killed. There is no saving Dumbledore, who would have been killed by the Death Eaters if Snape or the poison (or Draco under coercion) hadn't killed him. Snape has no time to figure out what's wrong with Dumbledore and rush out for the proper antidote, even if it were already prepared. (No Bezoar would work against such Dark magic, and some poisons have no antidote.) And with the Death Eaters there, Snape can't even attempt to save his life. If he does, the Death Eaters or the Unbreakable Vow will kill him. He has to conceal his loyalties (surely what Dumbledore wants him to do so that he can keep his cover and subvert Voldemort from within the ranks of the Death Eaters) or die. And if Snape dies, the boys will die, too, or be captured and turned over to Voldemort to be tortured and killed, one for failing to kill Dumbledore as ordered, the other for being the Prophecy Boy. Unable to save Dumbledore on the tower despite his newly revealed skills as a Healer (he's saved Dumbledore from the ring Horcrux, Katie Bell from the cursed necklace, and Draco from Sectumsempra), Snape can only choose to die from breaking the vow, accomplishing nothing and leaving the boys to the nonexistent mercies of the Death Eaters, or kill Dumbledore himself. Snape and only Snape can get Harry safely off the tower and the Death Eaters and Draco off the Hogwarts grounds. If Dumbledore dies in any other way, Fenrir Greyback will ravage Dumbledore's body and mayhem will ensue (as the bloodred rubies of the shattered Gryffindor hourglass and Hagrid's burning house suggest). Snape's first concern is for Draco, whom he gets safely to the gates. ("Run, Draco!") Then he has to contend with Harry, who has followed him. If Snape were evil, he would either have killed Harry on the spot or Stunned him and taken him as a captive to the Dark Lord without wasting time talking. Instead, he saves him from a Crucio and easily deflects all his spells, having ordered the three Death Eaters who have not been killed or Petrified off the grounds, and delivers some last, typically sarcastic advice, coupled with reasons that make him sound like a loyal Death Eater but which probably are not his real reasons: "No Unforgiveable Curses from you!" (sound advice, considering that Harry has to defeat Voldemort through the power Voldemort knows not: Love) and "Again and again and again until you learn to keep your mind closed and your mouth shut!" In other words, "If you're going to duel a Death Eater as skilled as I am, you'd better learn Occlumency and nonverbal spells." And he's right. Draco to the contrary, Dumbledore is not a "stupid old man." Nor has a wizard as old and wise as Dumbledore, one who saw through Tom Riddle from age eleven, been fooled all these years by Severus Snape, whom he knows much better than Harry does. I confidently predict that his complete trust in Snape will prove to be fully justified in Deathly Hallows. http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976915293 Carol, who has never posted an article accessible to the general public before and is feeling very nervous! From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Feb 21 16:29:36 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 11:29:36 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Harry cheating at Potions (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. Message-ID: <30012848.1172075376473.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165261 Betsy Hp: >I think he cheated during the contest for the Felix. Harry had a >cheat sheet the other students didn't have. And he's been lying the >entire year. I'm not saying we need to hang him. But he's not been >behaving with total nobility. Bart: Secondarily, if Harry even bothered to try to understand WHY tHBP's notes worked so well, it would have been more acceptable. But, in a class where the students are supposed to be learning theory, he's still on cookbook stuff. What did he think he was going to do for the OWL's? But that is Harry's biggest problem; given an easy way of achieving surface results, and a hard way of actually achieving his objective, he takes the easy way every time. Just to give a counter-example, real life: In 5th grade, our math textbook had quizzes. Our teacher gave us those quizzes a couple of times a week, grading us on both speed and accuracy. I discovered, in the back of the book, an answer key, which was encrypted. So I would figure out the problems in the quiz that would generate all the digits, and then just use the answer key to fill in the rest. However, I made no secret of the fact that this is what I was doing. When other students protested, the teacher pointed out that: 1) If I got a single problem wrong, EVERYTHING would be wrong (not entirely true, as the encryption key gave hints). 2) Everybody else was free to do the same thing, if they were willing to take the chance (nobody else was). The point was that, although I had a "cheat sheet" like Harry, unlike Harry, I learned the basis of how the cheat sheet worked, let the teacher and the class know what I was doing, and everybody was offered the same opportunity. However, as I mentioned, this is true to form for Harry. Snape is not entirely wrong about his publicity seeking; Harry does not want to be famous among his peers for things he didn't accomplish, but is more than flattered when adults, particularly those in authority, give him adoration. What he is told are the highest priorities by Dumbledore (and he says, numerous times, that he is loyal to Dumbledore), if it's too much work, he'll look at something else, easier, and sexier. In spite of the fact that he knows he needs to know his potions, he prefers looking like he knows his stuff to actually learning it. In the BACK TO THE FUTURE series of movies, the binding theme throughout is Marty's inability to refuse a dare which included the accusation of being "chicken". After this trait almost causes disaster several times, he finally learns his lesson, avoiding a life-destroying accident as a result. I certainly hope that, in Book 7, Harry learns his. Bart From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Feb 21 16:35:35 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:35:35 -0000 Subject: Half Blood Prince book In-Reply-To: <933229.30671.qm@web59103.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165262 > Violet here: > > First of, it wasn't Snape's book. Even thought Snape had used it, the book belonged to the school (McGonagall says Harry and Ron can use the school books until their own books arrive). So it wouldn't been his right to do so. I believe that book passed through many hands before reaching Harry's. Magpie: I don't see how this book doesn't belong to Snape. It says right inside: This book is the property of the Half-Blood Prince--Snape. The students buy their books, even if it's second hand or handed down to them from family. Hogwarts isn't like, for instance, a lot of high schools where they hand out books at the beginning of the year and take them back. McGonagall may of course be referring to books that the school has, but I think this particular book has an owner. -m From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 16:37:25 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:37:25 -0000 Subject: Half Blood Prince book In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702210752o49164a4fn57f5417af96710c7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165263 > montims: >For that > matter, presumably he could have accio'd it at any time if he had become > suspicious of Harry's achievements and seen that the book was missing from > the cupboard. Couldn't he? zgirnius: A slightly different angle on your question - I think Snape was suspicious that Harry was up to something he would not approve of when Slughorn started raving about Harry's Potions genius, but I don't think he knew what. It was only when he found Draco and Harry in the bathroom that he suddenly realized what was probably going on. At that point, he didn't Accio the book to confirm his suspicions, he used Legilimency. Even if he had suspected earlier, it's not Snape's usual style of doing business to get the proof and confront Harry with it. Far more typical of his approach would be to ask Harry about suspected wrongdoing and see what Harry says. The scene in CoS with the petrified cat is an example - Snape asks Harry to explain what happened. (Harry is concealing the voice he heard - for understandable reasons, but Snape can probably tell, and does not know why). The incident of Draco seeing Harry's head in Hogsmeade is another. Harry responds by lying (while engaging Snape in a staring contest, a detail that, post OotP, always makes me chuckle. We can be sure Snape *knew* he was lying.) And Snape again follows this pattern in the scene we are discussing. First he asks Harry where he learned the spell, then, when Harry lies to him, he satisfies himself as to the actual facts of the matter. --zgirnius From jnferr at gmail.com Wed Feb 21 16:46:52 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 10:46:52 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Half Blood Prince book In-Reply-To: References: <8ee758b40702210752o49164a4fn57f5417af96710c7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40702210846y6816ac48g1f04ae7d1e40c93e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165264 On 2/21/07, Zara wrote: > > > > montims: > >For that > > matter, presumably he could have accio'd it at any time if he had > become > > suspicious of Harry's achievements and seen that the book was > missing from > > the cupboard. Couldn't he? > > zgirnius: > A slightly different angle on your question - I think Snape was > suspicious that Harry was up to something he would not approve of > when Slughorn started raving about Harry's Potions genius, but I > don't think he knew what. It was only when he found Draco and Harry > in the bathroom that he suddenly realized what was probably going on. montims: thank you for your reply (which I have snipped), and your analysis which I agree with. What started me on this was wondering if something that had been placed in the RoR for safekeeping could be accio'd out of there by someone (the placer or someone else). I know the room disappears when not needed, but I was unsure of the further logistics... That led me on to the Snape/HBP book thought, which you have answered perfectly. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Wed Feb 21 16:50:33 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:50:33 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165265 colebiancardi Wrote: > at this point in the book, > Snape is not the enemy We will know on July 21 if that is true or not, but regardless of that outcome at this point in the story Harry had EVERY reason to consider Snape an enemy and none to consider him a friend. > he is trusted by Dumbledore. And Harry strongly suspected Dumbledore was wrong in having that trust, and as the book progressed his suspicion only deepened, and so did mine. > Harry lied because he knew that Snape > would take the book away and Harry didn't want that. Yes. > Harry knew that his use of the book, even > though there may not be any *written* rules > on it, was on the line of dishonesty. I'm going to repeat a question I asked before because I received no answer, if you can only use the standard textbook why does the school have a library? > why hide the book? You answered that question yourself, because he knew the enemy would take the book away and Harry didn't want that. And of course should never tell the truth to the enemy about anything if you can possibly avoid it, just on general principles. > Snape's comments to Harry about being > a liar & cheat were, IMHO, personal. Yes indeed, the Snape-Harry hatred is about as personal as you can get, even more personal than the Harry-Voldemort hatred. And you expect Harry to trust him? Maybe JKR can pull a rabbit out of a hat and somehow turn Snape into a good guy, I don't know, but I do know that at this point in the story Harry would be a fool to trust a man like that. A complete and utter fool. Pippin Wrote: > McGonagall backs Harry's punishment > [ ] because he's withholding evidence. It's a pity you can't find something in the books themselves that at least hints of this; it would really give the theory a boost. > McGonagall isn't the enemy -- there's no reason > Harry couldn't have told her about the book She didn't ask. And besides, Harry has as much a right to have secrets as anyone else, he is not duty bound to run to the authorities and tell them every thought in his head. Eggplant From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Feb 21 17:13:21 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:13:21 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] On lying and cheating Message-ID: <1284177.1172078001492.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165266 From: eggplant107 >People say Harry cheated in potions, but nobody can point to a rule he >violated. There is certainly no rule saying you can only use your >textbook to complete your studies, otherwise Hogwarts wouldn't have a >library. Harry didn't lie, he never told Slughorn "I was only reading >the standard textbook". Harry not only followed the letter of the law >he followed the spirit of the law too. He found a way to do things >that was better than that idiotic textbook and he ran with it. Good >for him! Bart: Even if Harry didn't break a single rule, he cheated the most important person of all: himself. In return for some praise from a teacher, he gave up a learning opportunity. It is clear that the NEWT level Potions is about learning theory and applying it. All Harry learned was some superior applications, which made it unecessary for him to learn the theory. Bart From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Wed Feb 21 17:55:35 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:55:35 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165268 "justcarol67" wrote: > There is no saving Dumbledore, who would > have been killed by the Death Eaters if > Snape or the poison (or Draco under coercion) > hadn't killed him. But of course if Snape hadn't taken that vow he could have turned his wand onto the Death Eaters instead of Dumbledore. It all goes back to that vow. Your central problem is explaining why a good Snape would make that crazy vow; and whatever the explanation you come up with it needs to be HUGE to justify such bizarre behavior. Saying it's good PR and might help Snape advance in the Voldemort organization in the coming years just doesn't cut it, and Snape being dazzled by Bellatrix's beauty is even worse. The best I've seen is the Dumbledore is a Horcrux theory, but even it has holes in it that need to be filled. And then there is the revulsion and hatred etched into the harsh lines of Snape's face as he murdered Dumbledore, that's a real problem too; it just doesn't sound like a good Snape to me. These obstacles may not be insurmountable but if JRR wants a good Snape she's going to have to work at it. And I don't quite get your point about Avada Kedavra; I don't much care if Snape killed him with it or in some other way, the point is he killed him. Eggplant From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 21 18:18:25 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 13:18:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: <1284177.1172078001492.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <1284177.1172078001492.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <005301c755e4$b1334460$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165269 --Bart Wrote-- >>>Even if Harry didn't break a single rule, he cheated the most important person of all: himself. In return for some praise from a teacher, he gave up a learning opportunity. It is clear that the NEWT level Potions is about learning theory and applying it. All Harry learned was some superior applications, which made it unecessary for him to learn the theory. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- This remains to be seen. It doesn't look to me that Harry has learned any less than he did while preparing for his OWLs. He already knew what a bezoar was and learned a new application for it, sure. But, he still attended the class as scheduled and did his assignments. We really can not determine what he has and has not learned during the course of the school year based on what we are given as canon. We are shown glimpses of what he has done in class throughout the year and only enough to drive the story. We have no idea what he learned or did not learn or how hard he studied or where or who he studied with. This is all just speculation, as much as we know what is included on the NEWTs exam for that matter. We really don't even know what amount GTL will have on the NEWTs. It may be a single question on the exam. There seems to be a theory portion of the exam and a practical exam which we see during OWLs. (Assuming, which is all we can do at this point, that NEWTs are similar in this manner, we don't know if the theory portion is worth more or less than the practical portion in final grading) Based on the information given in canon about the reasons for forming the DA, practical, hands on knowledge is more important to Harry than theory. So that may also be a contributing factor into why he uses the notes from the book. But again, the notes didn't make the potions themselves. Harry still had to have some knowledge and actually combine the ingredients for the result. I think Harry learned as much as anyone from the textbook (aside from Hermione of course) and has the added bonus of learning these little tips and tricks as well. Like crushing certain ingredients rather than cutting them provides more juice. He didn't have to concentrate too much to figure that one out because it's written right in the book. But this is theory he can apply to other things later on. He also spent a lot of his off time reading through the book and this was rare for Harry to be reading any book when it wasn't required. Who's to say he didn't realize something he never would have guessed at before or that something he read in the notes didn't help tie everything together? Even if it hasn't helped YET, he may think back to something in the notes later and it may sink in for him then. Many of us seem to have differing opinions of Harry's intentions and what he has actually learned from the Prince. But none of this can really be proven or disproved beyond reasonable doubt by canon. We will have to wait and see what is revealed in DH. Until then, this is all opinion and conjecture. I believe that Harry will return to Hogwarts and pass his NEWTs. This is what I think and hope. I don't see Harry as anymore of a liar or cheater than anyone else in the books for using the Prince's notes to help him through potions. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jnferr at gmail.com Wed Feb 21 18:29:47 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:29:47 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8ee758b40702211029g27e1a5e2nadc9c57b1b81153b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165270 > > "justcarol67" wrote: > > > There is no saving Dumbledore, who would > > have been killed by the Death Eaters if > > Snape or the poison (or Draco under coercion) > > hadn't killed him. > > Eggplant: > But of course if Snape hadn't taken that vow he could have turned his > wand onto the Death Eaters instead of Dumbledore. It all goes back to > that vow. Your central problem is explaining why a good Snape would > make that crazy vow; and whatever the explanation you come up with it > needs to be HUGE to justify such bizarre behavior. Saying it's good PR > and might help Snape advance in the Voldemort organization in the > coming years just doesn't cut it, and Snape being dazzled by > Bellatrix's beauty is even worse. The best I've seen is the Dumbledore > is a Horcrux theory, but even it has holes in it that need to be filled. montims: He had no choice IMO - he couldn't have "turned his wand onto the Death Eaters" AND remained in LV's camp, which is where he presumably has to be if he is to be of any help to Harry and/or the Order... Which makes him good. And if he is good, how many DEs could he have attacked before being killed himself? However, if he is bad, he would have no reason to turn his wand onto the Death Eaters instead of DD... As it stands, LV and the DEs should have no doubts at all that he is LV's through and through. (Whether he is or not...) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 21 18:49:53 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 13:49:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40702211029g27e1a5e2nadc9c57b1b81153b@mail.gmail.com> References: <8ee758b40702211029g27e1a5e2nadc9c57b1b81153b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <006401c755e9$152ab5d0$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165271 --montims wrote-- >>>He had no choice IMO - he couldn't have "turned his wand onto the Death Eaters" AND remained in LV's camp, which is where he presumably has to be if he is to be of any help to Harry and/or the Order... Which makes him good. And if he is good, how many DEs could he have attacked before being killed himself? However, if he is bad, he would have no reason to turn his wand onto the Death Eaters instead of DD... As it stands, LV and the DEs should have no doubts at all that he is LV's through and through. (Whether he is or not...) <<< I agree completely. Not to mention, if he had tried to fight off the Death Eaters, he was outnumbered and had to also consider the safety of Draco (and possibly Harry, if he knew Harry was there). Had he failed, Draco would have most certainly been killed by either the Death Eaters or by Lord Voldemort himself for failing his assignment. He would also have exposed himself as a spy, so if he had lived it would've rendered him virtually useless to the order. We really don't know exactly what plans the order has to carry out and this may seem as a mere act of self preservation on some levels, but Snape's survival may be critical to the overall plan. Dumbledore himself eluded to his own limitations and the fact that he was growing old, tried and susceptible to huge mistakes. Trusting Snape may have been one of those mistakes, but I don't believe it was. I think it was part of his plan. We still don't know what it was that caused Dumbledore to trust Snape so definitely. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 18:50:33 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:50:33 -0000 Subject: Was Harry cheating at Potions (was:Re: Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165272 Mike wrote: > Ron got a used book from the same cupboard, was he cheating? What if Ron's had additional notes that proved to be worse than the text's instructions, would Ron be cheating if he used those notes? Or is it only if your book has notes that improve your performance are you considered a cheater? IOW, just because Harry's used book was more useful than Ron's does not make Harry a cheater. And it is clearly legal for Harry or anybody to have a used book. Carol responds: Obviously, Ron wasn't cheating for using a used textbook with no notes in it. And Harry isn't cheating for using the notes, per se. He's cheating by taking credit for knowledge that isn't his. The person he's really hurting is himself since he's obviously not learning the material. It's obvious from the antidote assignment, when he resorts to producing a Bezoar (not cheating? He didn't do the work!) and his diminished results after he hides the HBP's book that he not only isn't a Potions genius like Teen!Severus, he's not even an excellent student like Hermione, who follows directions and understands the theory, even if she can't come up with Potions improvements on her own. Too bad the NEWT Potions class doesn't have closed-book tests. Harry would have failed dismally and revealed to Slughorn that he wasn't *earning* those high marks. He was relying on someone else's thinking and research and implicitly claiming credit for them. That may not be cheating, but it isn't honest, either. Scientists always cite the sources they've consulted in conducting their own experiments, and ethical students do the same thing. Mike: > [Quick aside here; does anybody besides me think that Snape continued to mark up that book well after his school days? When Harry makes the comment that he "Shouldn't have left his old book in the bottom of that cupboard", I immediately thought, 'that's cause he continued to use it'. I speculate that Snape made most of his potions improvements post school days. Just a feeling ;-)] Carol: Interesting thought, but I don't think so. Most of those hexes are the kind of thing that Hogwarts students, the boys, anyway, throw at each other. And if he were still noting his potions improvements in that book, he would certainly keep it with him in his office. (I think the potions improvements are all in his head now. He casts the directions on the board from memory and knows exactly what will happen at each step in the process. He's continued to work on the potions, all right, but not all of his improvements are noted in that book. I think he simply left it there as a schoolboy, and it's been lying there, forgotten and unconsulted, for twenty years. But, of course, we're both just guessing.) > Mike: > Is Harry disengenuous by not coming clean to Slughorn? Carol: Obviously, yes, or you wouldn't have to ask the question. He's concealing the fact that he's *not* a Potions genius from Slughorn, and he's desperate to keep Snape from finding the book and proving to Slughorn that it's the HBP, not Harry, who understands potions and potions theory. So, yes, it's disingenuous. He's concealing information that he doesn't want the teacher to find out. Motivation for telling the truth to Slughorn? How about simple honesty? He came up with the Bezoar "solution" because he didn't have a clue what he was doing. What if the truth comes out after he's been concealing it all year? Better to come clean from the beginning. And it really is unfair to Hermione, who works hard and knows what she's doing, for Harry, whose knowledge of Potions theory is as phony as Lockhart's defeat of the Wagga Wagga Werewolf, to earn higher marks for his feigned brilliance than she earns for her knowledge and effort. No wonder she's angry and wants nothing to do with the HBP's book. Mike: > I suppose one could say that the honorable thing would be for Harry to turn in the HBP's copy and proceed with his new book from Flourish and Blotts. Carol: Yes. Not only would doing so be fair to Hermione (and ease Harry's insufficiently guilty conscience) it would benefit the entire class. As someone pointed out, Slughorn is using an antiquated book from the days when Tom Riddle was a student. Possibly, he's never bothered to change textbooks in all his years of teaching or, possibly, no better book is available (but if so, he doesn't bother to substitute his own improved directions for the text). The potions improvements in the HBP's book would benefit all of Slughorn's students, especially the hard-working ones like Hermione who really care about Potions (and chances are, no one would be taking NEWT Potions if they didn't really care about the subject, especially since they must have thought when they bought their books that the class would be taught by Snape). I think it's been clearly established that Snape must have been using those improved potions directions in his own classes. If Slughorn had access to the HBP's notes, perhaps taking the trouble to test them out himself outside class, all of the students would benefit. (Hermione wouldn't think it was cheating if the whole class had access to the improved potions; she only thinks it's cheating when Harry uses information from an unknown source and claims it as his. And, IMO, she's right.) And BTW, it's quite possible that Slughorn would recognize that cramped handwriting and know whose notes they were, in which case, the right person would be credited with being a Potions genius. Mike: BTW, when did we allow Snape's opinion to become our moral compass? Carol: We're not using Snape as our moral compass. Snape believes in following and enforcing the rules, and some of us happen to agree with him in this instance--but not *because* Snape thinks Harry's cheating. Perhaps some posters are doing the opposite, thinking that Harry must not be cheating because Snape thinks he is. We can argue that Snape is right or wrong, but let's not base our judgments on whether or not Snape qualifies as a moral compass. Mike: Has anyone else accused Harry of being a cheat besides Snape? Carol: Only two people other than Snape (who suspects that Harry is using his book and claiming his research as his own, and confirms that suspicion through Legilimency) know that Harry is using the HBP's book, and Ron, whose standards when it comes to copying homework and even cheating on it (faking predictions in Divination, for example) are not high, would use the book if he could read the handwriting. Hermione, in contrast, doesn't use the word "cheating," but she obviously disapproves of what Harry is doing. I've already quoted her as saying he's received credit for Potions brilliance that he doesn't deserve, and her refusal to use the Prince's notes because she wants to follow the textbook directions and do her own work speaks for itself. > Mike: > Speaking of Hermione , I didn't notice her having a problem with helping out the boys herself. In fact, doesn't she help both Harry and Neville in *Potions*? Doesn't she as much as finish both Ron's and Harry's homework many times throughout the series? Why is it that only now, when Harry has someone (or something) else to help him that she gets indignant about Harry getting help? Carol: Now here I agree with you. All this time, she's been helping them with their homework, sometimes almost doing it for them. She disapproves of their inventing disasters in Divination, but she writes conclusions for their essays. She tells them that they need to learn the subjects for themselves, and yet she practically does their studying for them (except, of course, for casting spells, which they have to learn for themselves). Maybe Hermione *is* a bit jealous of Harry in Potions class, but she has reason to be. She knows what she's doing and he doesn't. It's like Hermione somehow beating out Harry as Seeker because she's put some sort of charm on her broom. He doesn't know what he's doing; she does; yet he's getting all the praise and credit. It isn't fair, and the fact that life isn't fair or that Snape isn't fair doesn't justify what Harry is doing. I don't much like HBP Hermione, espceially that Oppugno she cast when she was angry with Ron, but in this instance, she's right, and her jealousy of Harry should not be used to detract from the rightness of her position, any more than Snape's nasty personality or previous unfairness should be used to detract from the rightness of his. And BTW, Harry does lie to Snape, both regarding where he found Sectumsempra (in a library book!), regarding his Potions book (he's hidden the real one), and even regarding his nickname being Roonil Wazlib. Maybe that doesn't justify two months' worth of Saturday detentions, but it certainly qualifies as lying to a teacher. Carol, who is not arguing that Harry is a horrible person, only that he and his friends would be not only more intellectually honest but better off academically if they did their own work From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 19:07:25 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:07:25 -0000 Subject: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165273 Regarding the 'Harry Cheated in Potions' threads that are in progress. The discussion is too deep and complex to find a place to reply, so I'm starting this little thread. Some say that Harry is cheating in Potions by using the annotated HBP book. The implication is that he is cheating because he is taking credit for work that isn't his. But isn't that exactly what all the students are doing? Aren't they all working from Snape's instructions written on the board, or following a formula and procedure written in their own textbooks? How is what Harry doing any different than what all the students are doing, other that he is simply taking his formula and instructions from a different source. This is not a math or history test. This is analogous to a high school Chemistry or Physics experiment. The book gives you a set procedure, and everyone who follows the procedure is expected to have the same result within a normal range of variation. Would it be cheating for a student to look at their older brother's college Chem-Lab book and find better more detailed instructions and explanations, and then to apply that information in class? I just don't see how. Would that /really/ be a case of a student taking credit for someone else's work? Another little side point, if Harry were using this book in Snape's class, he would essentially just have his own personal copy of what Snape wrote on the board. We wouldn't say he was cheating then would we? It is not Harry's fault that Slughorn has chosen an outdated Potions textbook. I suspect if other students went to the bookstore or the Library and found their own preferred Potions Reference book, one that was up-to-date and reliable, there wouldn't have been a problem with them using it. That is, Slughorn wouldn't have minded. True that is speculation, but Snape never really assigns at textbook. There are two books assigned in First Year. One is a general reference, '1,001 Magical Herbs and Fungi' and another whose exact nature isn't known. It could be a book of Theory of Potions Making, it could be a beginner's book of potion recipes, or it could be 'History of Potions Making'. None the less, that second book is never referenced or used again. Snape has all the recipes in his head, or in his personal notes, and all classes are based on those notes. He writes the days instruction on the blackboard, and the test is NOT 'do you know the recipe' but can you follow the instructions accurately enough to produce the desired result. The key is 'The Desired Result'. Harry gets recognition for his end result, just as any student who could produce the correct end result would. Keep in mind that in a sense, end result is everything. The process is not being evaluated, it is assumed. It is the result that is judged. Harry gets good results. Again, I suspect that any student could bring in any secondary Potions reference and use it in class to suppliment their teacher assigned book. If Hermione has been her usual studious self, she would have gone to the library and found a better reference book. But in that moment she is being very Percy-ish; stuborn, pig-headed, and doggedly determined to follow the teacher assigned book. Not like her at all. Of course, we can never know with absolute certainty if additional reference books are allowed. But when compared to a typical Chemistry or Physics school lab experiment where results matter as a reflection of method, I don't see the problem. Keep in mind that Math, as an example, is just the oppossite; procedure is everything and the answer is incidental. In fact, they give you the answers in the back of the math book. So, to the point, all the students are copying out of some book or some reference. The purpose of the class is to gain practice at following a procedure that will supposedly lead you to a predetermined result. These students were obviously given a faulty procedure and it shouldn't have taken them that long to figure it out. At some point, the better students should have realized that they followed the procedure correctly and DIDN'T get the desired results. That should have been a clue they needed a better procedure. So why didn't they? Answer: they are typical lazy students who just plod along through school doing what's required and little more. Though I have to say, I'm a bit disappointed in the Ravenclaw students. You would think they would have more intellectual curiousity, and more determination not to be defeated by 'bad procedure'. Harry had the advantage because he took the added initiative; OK, it was a pretty easy intitiative, but why should that matter? Yet, whatever intitiative he did take, was equally available to the other students even if that particular book was not. Finally, to the idea that 'Harry cheated himself' by using the book. Again, I point out that they are all using a book. They are all using instructions given to them. Harry is just getting his instructions from a better source. And I say, that 'better sources' were available to all the students if they had taken the intitiative to seek them out. They could have compared the recipes in their class books to books in the library. They could have gone to Snape and said, 'I followed this procedure exactly, but it didn't work. Can you see anything wrong with it?'. I'm far more annoyed with Hermione than with Harry. Hermione KNEW from Harry's experience that there were better potions instructions. She knew the resource she had been given was out-of-date and ineffective. But rather than run to the library and find a better source of instructions, she doggedly carries on with instructions she knows are flawed. Very UN-Hermione-ish and very Percy-ish. Just one man's determined opinion. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 19:33:15 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:33:15 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165274 Carol earlier: > > There is no saving Dumbledore, who would have been killed by the Death Eaters if Snape or the poison (or Draco under coercion) hadn't killed him. > Eggplant responded: > But of course if Snape hadn't taken that vow he could have turned his wand onto the Death Eaters instead of Dumbledore. It all goes back to that vow. Your central problem is explaining why a good Snape would make that crazy vow; and whatever the explanation you come up with it needs to be HUGE to justify such bizarre behavior. Carol responds: Very true. I thought about bring the UV into the article (it's ot a normal HPfGU post), but it seemed like a tangent and I wanted to focus on the tower and subsequent events. I confess I'm assuming that Dumbledore knows all about the UV based on his comment to Harry after Harry tells him about the overheard conversation between Snape and Draco. Dumbledore seems to accept the necessity for the Unbreakable Vow. As for Snape's reasons for taking the UV, it's clear that his motivation in taking the vow in the first place relates to the first two provisions, protecting and watching over Draco. Those are the two things that Narcissa asked him to do (actually, she said "help" rather than "watch over," but Snape's idea of "helping" Draco turns out to be putting Crabbe and Goyle in detention and trying to find out what he's up to, so I don't think we can fault him there.) So Snape is putting his own life on the line to protect Draco, whose life he knows or suspects is in danger. I think that's what Dumbledore would want him to do, and it would be part of his duty as Head of Slytherin House to protect him and watch over him in any case. It's only the third provision, which he clearly didn't anticipate given the twitch, that presents a problem. Now I can't see into Snape's mind any more than you can, but I do know that he'd gone to great pains to protect his cover and provide explanations for the breaches in his loyalty to Voldemort that a fanatical DE like Bellatrix would understand (and spread to her fellow DEs). That can't be his primary motivation in taking that third provision, but I think it's a factor. So is Narcissa's state of mind. She's counting on him to protect Draco, and he can't let her down. In any case, his wand hand is bound to hers with ropes of fire and Bellatrix is standing over him with a wand. (True, she expects him to refuse to take that part of the vow, but what would have happened if he had? Clearly, there's some reason why he didn't take that risk.) It's possible that he thinks he can work around the third provision: If he tells Dumbledore about it, surely, Dumbledore, the most powerful and wisest wizard in the WW, can figure out a way to prevent a confrontation with Draco, the only thing, apparently, that can trigger the vow. And, certainly, DD knows from the beginning that Draco is trying to kill him (Snape has to have told him) and has taken every precaution (except, unfortunately, the one that counts) to prevent Death Eaters from entering Hogwarts and providing Draco with backup. And almost certainly Snape thinks that if someone *must* kill Dumbledore, and if it's the only way to save Draco's life, better Snape than Draco. I think that both Snape and Dumbledore want to protect Draco from becoming either a murderer or a murder victim, and if the only alternative is Snape becoming a murderer, so be it. Snape clearly doesn't want that to happen, as the twitch (and possibly the argument in the forest indicates), and he later tries to avoid it by interrogating Draco and following him around (luckily for Draco). But in the end, Dumbledore seems to accept the necessity or inevitability for his own death. Snape, who suffers mental anguish, the loss of his job, his freedom, and his mentor, the loss of trust of his fellow Order members, and even, probably, a split soul, is not so content. (I also think, BTW, that Snape became the DADA teacher by default when Slughorn accepted the Potions position on the same night as the visit to Spinner's End by the Black sisters, and that the UV--not planned by Narcissa since she didn't want Bellatrix to follow her--is the DADA curse falling into place, but, of course, that doesn't answer your question of why I think that Snape took the Unbreakable Vow. I just think that the UV in itslef does not prove that he's not Dumbledore's man.) > Eggplant: > And then there is the revulsion and hatred etched into the harsh lines of Snape's face as he murdered Dumbledore, that's a real problem too; it just doesn't sound like a good Snape to me. Carol: That part is partially answered in my original article. I stated that they could indicate self-hatred (or fury at Dimbledore for wanting him to commit murder and keep his vow) and revulsion at the deed he has to perform. I should add that we're seeing the look of hatred and revulsion from Harry's pov, not Snape's, so he thinks that they indicate hatred of and revulsion for Dumbledore. But when have we ever seen any such feeling for DD on Snape's part? The most we've seen is resentment when Dumbledore disregards his opinion. And Snape is insulted when Fake!Moody implies that he may be trying to injure Harry behind Dumbledore's back: Dumbledore trusts me! (I believe, though of course I can't prove it, that the trust is merited.) And as I said in the article and have said on this list, Snape's look of hatred and revulsion parallels the self-hatred and repulsion that Harry feels in the cave. The similarity in wording can't be accidental, and Harry, too, has been coerced into making a promise that he doesn't want to keep, a promise that could well lead to Dumbledore's death (and did in fact contribute to it, given DD's weakened state). > Eggplant: > And I don't quite get your point about Avada Kedavra; I don't much care if Snape killed him with it or in some other way, the point is he killed him. Carol: But did he? If the AK is a cover for some other spell, he didn't actually murder DD; he only allowed him to die from the poison in the cave, out of reach of Fenrir Greyback and with no need for Harry to feel that *he* is the murderer. It just strikes me that the supposed AK doesn't act the way a Killing Curse is supposed to act. We've been conditioned to expect a blinding flash of green light since the second chapter of SS/PS, and it didn't happen this time. And I think it's important that Snape sent the body, or the still-living DD over the battlements to what appears to be a soft landing. Had he not done so, Harry would never have gotten off the tower alive. Carol, thanking Eggplant for reading her article and agreeing that the UV is also crucial in determining Snape's loyalties From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Feb 21 20:14:17 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:14:17 -0000 Subject: Voldermort learning the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165275 SSSusan, earlier: > > See, that's just it. I can't figure out how knowing the full > > prophecy WOULD change much. ??? So he'd know for certain > > (if he interprets it how DD & Harry did) that either he's gotta > > kill the little snot or the little snot's gonna kill him, but > > since he's ALREADY determined to kill the little snot, it > > wouldn't exactly mark a change in his strategy. houyhnhnm: > Since *we* know the whole prophecy, we can see that LV's knowing > it would not change much, but Voldemort doesn't know what it is > he doesn't know. So, for all he knows, the rest of the prophecy > might contain the secret of Harry's defeat. SSSusan: Right. I totally agree with this. But for me this leaves the question: If Voldy got ahold of it and heard it, so he then knew what we already know, how *would* this change his strategy? Would it change it at all? Siriusly Snapey Susan, still curious if anyone can think of a way that full knowledge of the prophecy's contents would alter Voldy's strategy From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed Feb 21 20:25:44 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:25:44 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40702211225x7fef3816tfeaef522f7281fb9@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165276 > Eggplant > > And I don't quite get your point about Avada Kedavra; I don't much > care if Snape killed him with it or in some other way, the point is he > killed him. > Kemper now: We won't know until 7/21 whether or not Snape killed Dumbledore. It could have been the poison from the cave that did Dumbledore in. And it was neverbadandneverwrongHarry that forced that down Dumbledore's throat. Kemper From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 20:53:16 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:53:16 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: <700201d40702211225x7fef3816tfeaef522f7281fb9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165277 > > Eggplant > > > > And I don't quite get your point about Avada Kedavra; I don't much > > care if Snape killed him with it or in some other way, the point is he > > killed him. > > > > Kemper now: > We won't know until 7/21 whether or not Snape killed Dumbledore. Alla: Sorry, Kemper, but I am jumping in for a second just to disagree with your wording. IMO we **do** know that Snape killed Dumbledore, because he said AK and Dumbledore died. I know, I know it is a straightforward reading, but I just think that is too much of switching the gears, so to speak It is the same for me as if you would say that we don't know whether Lupin is Evil or not. As far as I am concerned we do know that he is not evil. Now, there is a possibility that he IS, since clues can be interpreted Pippin's way, but from reading the text I do not see that he is. Same with Snape's killing Dumbledore. It is of course possible that Avada Kedavra is not really AK and poison did Dumbledore in, but that is not what I read on the page. It is IMO reading between the words and it is of course can be correct, if that makes sense. Kemper: > It could have been the poison from the cave that did Dumbledore in. Alla: Yes, sure it could have been. Kemper: > And it was neverbadandneverwrongHarry that forced that down Dumbledore's throat. Alla: LOL. From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Feb 21 21:16:16 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 21:16:16 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165278 > Carol earlier: > > > There is no saving Dumbledore, who would have been killed by the > Death Eaters if Snape or the poison (or Draco under coercion) hadn't > killed him. > > > Eggplant responded: > > But of course if Snape hadn't taken that vow he could have turned > his wand onto the Death Eaters instead of Dumbledore. Pippin: Dumbledore did not want Harry to risk even a drop of blood on his behalf. Risks that Harry must take to destroy Voldemort are another matter. But saving Dumbledore will not bring the destruction of the Dark Lord any closer, while Harry's destruction will put it beyond reach. For the purposes of the plan, Dumbledore is expendable, Harry is not. Dumbledore himself emphasized that he might order Harry to leave him in danger and flee, and that he would expect such an order to be carried out. Dumbledore would not want frozen Harry exposed to the risk of wild spells bouncing everywhere in a melee, even if he thought Snape could win (which is doubtful considering his showing against Fluffy and the combined attack of the Trio in POA. When it comes to fighting a legilimens, three heads are definitely better than one.) All this is to say that even if Snape hadn't taken the vow, Dumbledore wouldn't have done anything differently on the tower. The only thing the vow did that night, IMO, is compel Snape to ignore the battle below and go straight to Draco's aid. But that too, I think, is what Dumbledore would have wanted. > Eggplant: > > And then there is the revulsion and hatred etched into the harsh > lines of Snape's face as he murdered Dumbledore, that's a real problem > too; it just doesn't sound like a good Snape to me. Pippin: Snape does not show the involuntary signs which seem to appear when he's exhibiting genuine anger. There's no pulse throbbing in his temple, no glittering eyes or paleness. So whatever is causing his hate and revulsion, I don't think it's hostility towards Dumbledore. Pippin From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Feb 21 21:15:04 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 21:15:04 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165279 > Eggplant: > > And then there is the revulsion and hatred etched into the harsh > lines of Snape's face as he murdered Dumbledore, that's a real problem > too; it just doesn't sound like a good Snape to me. > > Carol: But when have we ever > seen any such feeling for DD on Snape's part? Hickengruendler: I always thought the "hatred on revulsion" as a hint towards Dumbledore's man Snape. And the reason is exactly Carol's argument here. Why should Snape *hate* Dumbledore? I see no reason. Let's say Snape is indeed evil and fooled Dumbledore either all the time since his supposed return to the good side, or he switched sides again at some point and fooled Dumbledore since then. Then why should he hate him? Having disrepect at him, yes. Secretly grinning about that old trusting fool, maybe use the opportunity shortly before his death to gloat a bit. (We all know that Snape is far from being above such behaviour). But why should he hate him? That he killed Dumbledore is no prove of any hatred. Did Peter Pettigrew hate Cedric Diggory? Did Voldemort hate Frank Bryce or Bertha Jorkins? I don't think so. These people were killed because they way in the way/useless, and Voldemort wanted dispose of them. JKR did not overdo it here, in having Peter a look of revuslion of hatred in his face, when he killed Cedric. Because Peter has no reason to hate Cedric. Just as I see no reason for Snape hating Dumbledore. Quite in contrast, I would say. If Snape showed happy feeling the moment he killed old Albus, I would argue that it would speak much more against him, than the expression of revulsion on his face. From juli17 at aol.com Wed Feb 21 21:14:50 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:14:50 -0500 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: <1172078396.1000.57829.m20@yahoogroups.com> References: <1172078396.1000.57829.m20@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C9241474F280CC-F4-19AD@webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165280 Bart: Even if Harry didn't break a single rule, he cheated the most important person of all: himself. In return for some praise from a teacher, he gave up a learning opportunity. It is clear that the NEWT level Potions is about learning theory and applying it. All Harry learned was some superior applications, which made it unecessary for him to learn the theory. Julie: Speaking of Harry, isn't it interesting that we rarely use how Harry judges *himself* as a barometer for his intents and actions? When Harry blames Snape for getting Sirius killed, he knows he is being unreasonable--he thinks just this to himself. When Harry uses Sectumsempra on Draco he is immediately filled with guilt and remorse. He knows he lost control and his intent to cause some minor bodily harm resulted in a nearly fatal attack. And when Harry uses the HBP Potions book he knows he's taking credit for work that is not his own, rather than acknowledging that he is borrowing from another persons work. And he knows it is if not against the rules, certainly it's doesn't speak well of his integrity in this instance. Harry *knows* when he's being less than noble. He knows when he's lying, or cheating, or placing unfair blame. He never fails to acknowledge it, at least in his own mind. He's still young, of course, so sometimes he does the wrong thing anyway for what it will gain him (which rarely has had ANYTHING to do with fighting a war, BTW). In all this debating back and forth, I can't think of anyone more qualified to judge Harry's behavior than Harry himself, since he does a very good job of it! And I do find it comforting that Harry always knows the difference between right and wrong--or right versus easy--since I think that this may play a large role in his ability to defeat Voldemort--for instance, if he must see Snape more clearly, and acknowledge his own misjudgments, during the course of this battle. (This is the one of the things Snape seems incapable of, which may be why he can't defeat Voldemort). Harry may fool some people when he wants to, but ultimately he's not able to fool himself. Julie ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 21:23:47 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 21:23:47 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165281 > Hickengruendler: > > I always thought the "hatred on revulsion" as a hint towards > Dumbledore's man Snape. And the reason is exactly Carol's argument > here. Why should Snape *hate* Dumbledore? I see no reason. > > Let's say Snape is indeed evil and fooled Dumbledore either all the > time since his supposed return to the good side, or he switched sides > again at some point and fooled Dumbledore since then. Then why should > he hate him? Having disrepect at him, yes. Secretly grinning about that > old trusting fool, maybe use the opportunity shortly before his death > to gloat a bit. (We all know that Snape is far from being above such > behaviour). But why should he hate him? That he killed Dumbledore is no > prove of any hatred. Alla: That's easy though. Pure speculation obviously, but DD may have forced Snape to do something he did not want to do. Take your pick. Dumbledore may have some leverage over Snape when he forced him to keep his mouth shut after the Prank. Now we all know that Prank is a huge deal in the series, we also know that Snape revealed Lupin's condition the second he had a good chance to do so and not encounter DD wrath. OR Dumbledore may have forced Snape to go back to spying when he did not want to. Now that is of course more OFH! Snape or out for whatever reason Snape, than purely evil one, but still, would not Snape hate Dumbledore if he would want to leave Hogwarts and do whatever, when Dumbledore forces him to constantly risk his life? And now Snape has to go back to Voldemort permanently, because old fool just won't die. Again, those are obviously speculations, nothing more, but it is no problem for me at all to imagine that Snape hates DD. JMO, Alla From april.minor at arkansas.gov Wed Feb 21 21:31:09 2007 From: april.minor at arkansas.gov (arminor75) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 21:31:09 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165282 Eggplant: But of course if Snape hadn't taken that vow he could have turned his wand onto the Death Eaters instead of Dumbledore. It all goes back to that vow. Your central problem is explaining why a good Snape would make that crazy vow; and whatever the explanation you come up with it needs to be HUGE to justify such bizarre behavior. Saying it's good PR and might help Snape advance in the Voldemort organization in the coming years just doesn't cut it, and Snape being dazzled by Bellatrix's beauty is even worse. April: It makes me wonder if Draco isn't somehow critical to the taking down of LV. I am a firm "Snape's good" believer, so I've been tossing around an idea that Draco plays some major part in the downfall of LV, either helping Harry or undoing LV in someway that helps Harry. Everything Snape and DD did in HBP was to save the lives Harry AND Draco. Part of me thinks this is just because Draco is a kid and DD wanted him to CHOOSE the white hats, but another part of me wonders if there isn't some other reason that Draco needs to live. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 21:49:51 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 21:49:51 -0000 Subject: Draco's role in DH (WAS Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165283 > April: > Everything Snape and DD did in HBP was to save the lives Harry AND > Draco. Part of me thinks this is just because Draco is a kid and DD > wanted him to CHOOSE the white hats, but another part of me wonders if > there isn't some other reason that Draco needs to live. zgirnius: If you are asking for reasons that Snape and Dumbledore considered in formulating whatever plans they made in HBP, I'm drawing a blank. I tend to think it was the simple matter of his being a kid and Dumbledore wanting him to have the freedom to choose a better path. If you mean, is there something *Rowling* needs Draco to do, so she's keeping him alive, I do have a suggestion. Assuming DDM!Snape (I know I do ) Rowling had a problem. She has gotten a good guy into the heart of the enemy camp, where she can have him discover all sorts of vital stuff, but in the process she has made it so that noone on the good side will believe him. (More likely, they'll hex him on sight.) I think Draco could play the role of go-between. Harry is aware of the offer Dumbledore made to Draco, aware of Draco's predicament (the threat by Voldemort to his family), and pities him. If Draco were to approach Harry, offering him information in exchange for the same deal Dumbledore wanted to give him, I think Harry might believe him, and the information. From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Feb 21 22:01:06 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 22:01:06 -0000 Subject: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165284 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > Regarding the 'Harry Cheated in Potions' threads that are > in progress. The discussion is too deep and complex to > find a place to reply, so I'm starting this little thread. > > Some say that Harry is cheating in Potions by using the > annotated HBP book. The implication is that he is > cheating because he is taking credit for work that isn't > his. > > But isn't that exactly what all the students are doing? > Aren't they all working from Snape's instructions written > on the board, or following a formula and procedure > written in their own textbooks? How is what Harry doing > any different than what all the students are doing, other > that he is simply taking his formula and instructions > from a different source. > > This is not a math or history test. This is analogous to > a high school Chemistry or Physics experiment. The book > gives you a set procedure, and everyone who follows the > procedure is expected to have the same result within a > normal range of variation. Would it be cheating for a > student to look at their older brother's college Chem-Lab > book and find better more detailed instructions and > explanations, and then to apply that information in > class? I just don't see how. Would that /really/ be > a case of a student taking credit for someone else's > work? Magpie: Agreed. Harry *does* cheat when he pulls the bezoar trick, of course, not doing the work. He does that publicly. Harry's isn't somehow not doing work by following a different formula. That's like saying you're a bad cook if you follow a better recipe. He's dishonest by letting Slughorn think he's a Potions genius. He didn't add peppermint because it cut down on nose tweaking or because he had a good idea about Potions, he added it because it was in the directions. However, "cheating" is not always a word that's used for specifics, but more of a feeling. It feels like Harry's cheating because in a general sense he is. He's in a class of students who are all working out of the same book with their different skill levels to guide them. Harry finds himself with a leg up. He's always going to come out ahead because he's working with better formulas. If Harry were being strictly fair, he'd tell everyone, or the teacher, or tell the teacher he's got a better recipe so he doesn't really deserve to always be called the best student in the class--it's his recipe that's the best in the class. So he may not be cheating the way you'd cheat on a test but he does have a secret advantage that puts him ahead of the class every time. It would be easy to imagine, for instance, Blaise Zabini thinking, "No way Potter's suddenly better than everyone. He's got to have a secret." And then finding the textbook and saying, "I knew it. Potter's not the best in the class--he's the only one with the corrected formulas!" Is it cheating in school to use the corrected formula? No--why not learn the Potion the right way? Is it cheating to get the title of "best in the class?" Sure--because Harry isn't, as Slughorn thinks, acheiving his better results through anything to do with himself. Is it dishonest? Only when he allows himself to be seen as making the improvements himself. Steve: > Another little side point, if Harry were using this book > in Snape's class, he would essentially just have his own > personal copy of what Snape wrote on the board. We > wouldn't say he was cheating then would we? It is not > Harry's fault that Slughorn has chosen an outdated > Potions textbook. > > I suspect if other students went to the bookstore or > the Library and found their own preferred Potions > Reference book, one that was up-to-date and reliable, > there wouldn't have been a problem with them using it. > That is, Slughorn wouldn't have minded. Magpie: Nope, it's not Harry's fault at all. But it is a secret advantage to getting his Potions better than everyone else's in faster time that doesn't have to do with himself. And in guarding those instructions for himself and his friends (if they were smart enough to use them, duh, Hermione!) Harry is obviously guarding that advantage. He wants to be that good. It's of course valid to ask why Harry should share his corrected text--and he doesn't. But it's also valid to ask why he wouldn't. Potions class isn't supposed to be a competition. If you actually care about learning Potions and have an interest in the subject, why would you want to keep this sort of thing from your fellow students? Why keep your fellow students working with inefficient formulas? Snape seems to have wanted them all to have them, writing them on the board. I think many students wouldn't have thought twice about being open about the better formulas--if you care about Potions as a subject that seems like an obvious thing to do. This isn't an additional reference book, but a corrected, better formula. (And I'm totally with Steve on thinking Hermione is crazy and pig-headed for not using them. I wouldn't be surprised if the other students in the class wouldn't have demanded they all get copies if they found out about it. If I were Harry's friend I'd be sure to be using it with him in class. You don't gain anything by doing the Potion in a less efficient way.) I think this also speaks to something larger in the series, though. I said cheating was not so much always something that followed rules but more of a "feeling" you got. I've noticed that comes up a lot in canon and in fandom. Take Quidditch, for instance. I've often picked up on a sort of understood idea that there are "pure" winners, or someone whose winning isn't really pure so doesn't count. One of the things that makes Cedric a good guy is the way whenever his dad brags about him beating Harry he says no, he didn't feel like he really beat him because he was unconscious. Like, just recently someone mentioned in passing that Malfoy was "afraid" of facing Harry on an "even playing field" in Quidditch because he wanted a Nimbus 2001. The word cheating wasn't used, but clearly there was a feeling that Malfoy's wanting this fast broom came from feeling he couldn't really beat Harry fairly--on an "even field." People often refer to the Slytherins' 2001s as an advantage that shows they can't really play as well. Though of course there was no mention of the fact that usually it's Harry himself who is on the faster broom. In fact, in another Quidditch conversation years ago I remember someone who seemed very put out by Harry's canonical broom advantage--they weren't angered by it, they just didn't want it to be there. If canon said Harry was on a faster broom they instead insisting he maybe just "flew more aerodynamically." Even more interestingly, on the subject of flying, I remember I used to often hear that if Malfoy flew well it didn't really count because he probably had "lots of lessons" and "practiced all the time." Now, leaving aside that we don't know how Malfoy learned to fly (perhaps if he'd had lessons he wouldn't be told he was holding his broom wrong first year, to the delight of Harry and Ron), it was interesting what this seemed to imply, that learning something and practicing all the time meant you'd learned your skill *less* than the person who had it gifted to him by blood or fate. Harry was the "real" talent because it came to him easily. Malfoy was less deserving in this scenario because of his study and practice. Clearly when it comes to Potions Harry's fine at it, but is completely not the Potions natural Slughorn thinks he is. He isn't getting his results the way Slughorn thinks he is, so can be said to be "cheating" to get his reputation as a natural and better than everyone else in the class. (Btw, Carol mentioned Hermione never uses the word cheating--she does once refer to 'cheats' before Harry pulls the bezoar trick by saying he's being asked to something where he has to understand the principles so 'no cheats or tricks.' This is presumably ironic since it's Harry's most blatant cheat yet.) Btw, that is perhaps Slughorn's fault too--he seems kind of incapable of creating a non-competitive environment where he's not looking for the best and playing favorites. He likes to have people working for his praise. I can't imagine that if Lupin were teaching this class the book would be such an advantage. Wouldn't be surprised if Lupin attempted to get "natural" Harry to help others and quickly realized there was something else going on here, at which point he'd probably study the HBP's book himself and teach from his improved formulas after testing them himself. Anyway, that's why I think there's a reason this subject is so up for debate. Harry's obviously not "cheating" in the sense of having the answers to a test written on his hand. He's usually doing exactly what every other kid is doing in the class is doing in terms of following a formula from a book to make a Potion. But there are many ways that validate the feeling that he's cheating--ways that I think Harry would feel were cheating if Theodore Nott were doing it, let's say. In fact, he already seems to feel that way about himself. I wonder if that vague feeling of wanting talent or skill to be honestly earned or a sign of some inner talent hangs over this discussion as well, and is behind wanting Harry's use of the book to show an interest in Potions, or like getting tutoring, or looking up books in the library, or doing experiments on his own. The kind of stuff the real Prince probably did. When he doesn't want to get rid of the book there's a lot of things he'd miss--his "friend," the advice, the many spells. But he's also not ready for Slughorn to struggle in class or have Slughorn find out about the reason for his success. When it comes to the Potions notes he wants the *advantage*, not just the better Potions. -m From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed Feb 21 22:09:53 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:09:53 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: References: <700201d40702211225x7fef3816tfeaef522f7281fb9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <700201d40702211409j44f1e9edv9b7238a335f21cf0@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165285 > > > Eggplant wrote: > > > > > > And I don't quite get your point about Avada Kedavra; I don't much > > > care if Snape killed him with it or in some other way, the point is > he > > > killed him. > > > > > > > Kemper responded earlier: > > We won't know until 7/21 whether or not Snape killed Dumbledore. > > Alla replied to me: > > Sorry, Kemper, but I am jumping in for a second just to disagree with > your wording. IMO we **do** know that Snape killed Dumbledore, because > he said AK and Dumbledore died. > > I know, I know it is a straightforward reading, but I just think that > is too much of switching the gears, so to speak > > ... It is of course possible that > Avada Kedavra is not really AK and poison did Dumbledore in, but that > is not what I read on the page. Kemper now: Hi Alla! We know Snape said AK. We know Dumbledore is dead. We do not know that Snape caused Dumbledore's death. Some of us /suspect/ that Snape killed Dumbledore based on the info on the page, and some of us /suspect/ that Snape made it appear as though he killed Dumbledore based on the info on the same page. I think both our readings are straightforward and our arguments legitimate. > > Kemper: > > And it was neverbadandneverwrongHarry that forced that down > Dumbledore's throat. > > Alla: > > LOL. Kemper now: Thank you. Thank you very much. :-) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 22:24:32 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 22:24:32 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: <700201d40702211409j44f1e9edv9b7238a335f21cf0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165286 > > > Kemper responded earlier: > > > We won't know until 7/21 whether or not Snape killed Dumbledore. > > > > Alla replied to me: > > > > Sorry, Kemper, but I am jumping in for a second just to disagree with > > your wording. IMO we **do** know that Snape killed Dumbledore, because > > he said AK and Dumbledore died. > > > > I know, I know it is a straightforward reading, but I just think that > > is too much of switching the gears, so to speak > > > > ... It is of course possible that > > Avada Kedavra is not really AK and poison did Dumbledore in, but that > > is not what I read on the page. > > Kemper now: > > Hi Alla! We know Snape said AK. We know Dumbledore is dead. > We do not know that Snape caused Dumbledore's death. > Some of us /suspect/ that Snape killed Dumbledore based on the info on > the page, and some of us /suspect/ that Snape made it appear as though > he killed Dumbledore based on the info on the same page. > > I think both our readings are straightforward and our arguments legitimate. Alla: Heee, legitimate - of course. Every argument based on canon is legitimate and believe me, I do realise that my reading can be completely wrong. But as to whether whose reading is more straightforward, we are having difference of opinion here. Let me put it this way and I am not being sarcastic at all. I remember one incident in canon when person was attacked with AK and did not die. And as we know ( I think) that was a real AK. I do not remember **any** incidents in canon when person was attacked with **fake** AK. I can misremember of course. Is it possible that it was **fake** AK? Sure. But sorry, I cannot agree that this is a straightforward reading anymore than I can agree that ESE!Lupin is a straightforward reading. Sorry. JMO, Alla. From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Wed Feb 21 23:00:20 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:00:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: Transference of power - WAS : A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: References: <700201d40702211409j44f1e9edv9b7238a335f21cf0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001501c7560c$1625f0d0$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165287 --Alla Wrote-- >>>I remember one incident in canon when person was attacked with AK and did not die. And as we know ( I think) that was a real AK. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- I have the BEGINNINGS of a theory forming. This is based on my memory of events from canon, but I haven't really hashed it all out yet, so I wanted to put it out there for opinions from everyone. We know (for the most part) what happened in GH that night. Lord Voldemort tried to kill Harry, but failed when Lily sacrificed herself, thereby killing the Dark Lord (Sort of) and transferring some of his powers and his mark onto Harry. Harry was also given the power of the blood magic by his mother's sacrifice. In a way, Dumbledore sacrificed himself to protect Harry and Draco on the tower. (Assuming that his death was foreseen and prepared for). Is it then possible that Dumbledore could have used this event to try to transfer some of his own power to Harry as well. Or maybe he transferred some power to Severus. Dumbledore seemed to have more knowledge of these old magics than anyone else and may have thought it was the best and final way he could help Harry since he was growing old and his wand hand was not healing. Transferring some of his power to Snape could have also been beneficial to the order, now with Snape able to go even deeper into Lord Voldemort's camp. Again, this is just a budding theory and I appreciate any theories or comments anybody would like to add based on what we know. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 23:04:12 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 23:04:12 -0000 Subject: Harry's "friend," the HBP (Was: Freud and JKR / Id vs. Superego ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165288 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > The Prince, IMO, is all about animal need (or the id) at the point > > he invented that spell. This is a boy on his way to becoming a > > Death Eater, after all. > > > >>Carol: > From my point ov view, Sectumsempra is about a boy on his way to > becoming a Death Eater. "For Enemies" more than suggests that he has > revenge on his mind. But Muffliato is just a charm to allow a kid to > talk with his friends without being overheard. > Betsy Hp: Exactly. I think the Prince started out as basically a good kid. He had a slightly dark sense of humor (like Harry), but wasn't seething with anger. But that changed, and I think Harry, going through similar emotions (it's interesting to track his evolving view of Snape through the books), easily follows the Prince's slide. So when Harry is in a place where he *wants* to strike out in anger at someone, the Prince hands him the perfect weapon. > >>Carol: > Teen!Snape sounds like he's on his way to becoming a Healer or > researcher to me. Too bad Lucius Malfoy or the Slytherin gang or > whoever recruited him took advantage of the anger provoked by > Severus's Hogwarts enemies in his "worst memory" and the so-called > Prank, and of Severus's hunger for recognition (still evident as an > adult if the Order of Merlin is any indication) and directed him > toward Voldemort. Betsy Hp: Hmmm... Well, first off I utterly refuse to see Snape as someone hungry for recognition (of the public kind anyway). The Order of Merlin thing is Lupin's bugaboo, and Lupin lies too easily for me to take *only* his word (especially his angry word) on something. I think Snape likes to be *right*, but that's a very seperate thing from recognition. But second, I don't like putting Snape's choice to become a Death Eater onto other people's shoulders so much. I don't see this as poor innocent lamb Snape getting sucked in by the Death Eater wolves (like Pinocchio going off to "bad boy" land or whatever it was). I think Snape does have some responsibility for choosing to believe whatever story was fed him. And for letting his anger and resentment play such a role in his choosing. > >>Carol: > As for Harry, I agree that he's in danger of letting the desire for > revenge control him,... > But that's not what Harry identifies with in the HBP's Potions book > as far as I can tell. He's interested in the Prince's creativity > and, sad to say, in getting credit for the Prince's work. Betsy Hp: See, I really think Harry's connection to the Prince went much deeper than that. Harry reads through the book whenever he has the spare time; he reads the book at night; he defends the book (or the Prince) to his friends; he protects the book (or the Prince) from his enemies. I really got the sense that this wasn't just a neat instruction book Harry stumbled across, this was someone who Harry was able to personally relate to. Which is why he was so painfully eager for the Prince to actually be his father. > >>Carol: > (He can tell that the Prince is a boy, probably because more boys > than girls are interested in hexes... Betsy Hp: I seriously doubt Harry's understanding that the Prince was a boy was based on such reasoning. He does know Ginny after all. > >>Carol: > ...and because of the tone of the Bezoar remark, but I'm not sure > that the Prince provides any personal information for Harry to > identify with except on this general level. Harry can't even tell > that the Prince is a Slytherin.) Betsy Hp: I strongly disagree. There was enough there for Harry to personally identify with the Prince. The book was not just an instruction manual. (And of course Harry doesn't identify the Prince as Slytherin! Harry's got too much invested in denying his own Slytherin traits. ) > >>Carol, who wonders if the HBP's teachers realized what a genius > he was and guesses that Slughorn did but McGonagall didn't Betsy Hp: Slughorn, definitely. Snape didn't get into the Slug Club based on breeding or charm. I'd bet that McGonagall recognized his talents though. It wouldn't surprise me if most of the staff didn't see Snape as someone to watch. And really, as far as that goes Snape proved them all right. Potions Master *and* Head of House at his age? Pretty well done, I think. Betsy Hp From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Feb 21 23:14:59 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 23:14:59 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: <700201d40702211225x7fef3816tfeaef522f7281fb9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165289 > Kemper now: > We won't know until 7/21 whether or not Snape killed Dumbledore. > It could have been the poison from the cave that did Dumbledore in. > And it was neverbadandneverwrongHarry that forced that down > Dumbledore's throat. Jen: I see the connection between Harry and Snape both having the looks of hatred and revulsion and the literary reason for JKR to connect those two looks. But having her eqaute the two *situations* in their entirety doesn't work for me personally. Prophecy boy or no, Harry is not an adult member of the Order of the Phoenix or a double agent and he is still a student under the care of Dumbledore. Harry has not taken any Vows prior to the cave, nor are his hands tied as Snape's are on the tower. Their looks and feelings are the only similarities I see between them in the two scenarios. If Dumbledore died of the poison, Harry would be devastated to discover that fact (just as it's entirely believable to me Snape was devastated by the tower). I'm not certain finding out Snape 'covered' for Harry and then being goaded by Snape about that fact would advance the story in any way, instead it could be one more point of hatred for Snape where a Potter should be thanking him on bended knee and another point for Harry to chalk up for why he should hate Snape. I know 'neverbadandneverwrong' Harry is just a joke, it just struck me how many posts at the moment are about 'Snape vs. Harry', as if one has to be bad for the other to be good and vice-versa. I find that counter to where JKR is headed with the two of them, counter to her themes of unity and love. It's doubtful these two will ever love each other , but I also don't see JKR turning the way Dumbledore died into another weapon in the war these two are currently waging with each other. Jen, congratulating Carol for publishing her very well-written and well- supported essay. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 21 23:50:45 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 23:50:45 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165290 Alla wrote: > I do not remember **any** incidents in canon when person was attacked with **fake** AK. I can misremember of course. > > Is it possible that it was **fake** AK? Sure. But sorry, I cannot > agree that this is a straightforward reading anymore than I can agree > that ESE!Lupin is a straightforward reading. Sorry. Carol responds: I agree that a real AK is the more straightforward reading, but still, as I pointed out in the post that started this thread, and as others have also pointed out, Snape's AK on the tower is an anomaly, different in many respects from the other AKs we've seen. To quote from my original post, which has been rather liberally snipped: "For one thing, it's not even certain that the spell Snape cast on the Astronomy Tower was an Avada Kedavra. Other spells, such as the one that injured Tonks in the Department of Mysteries, send out jets of green light like the one the narrator describes coming from Snape's wand in "The Lightning-Struck Tower." Avada Kedavra, in contrast, is described three times in Goblet of Fire, always accompanied with a "blinding flash of green light" and a rushing sound, neither of which is described in relation to Snape's spell. And the Avada Kedavra victims we've seen (notably Cedric Diggory and the Riddles) have died with their eyes open and a surprised or horrified expression. Dumbledore dies with his eyes closed, as if he had time to come to terms with his death, and his "wise old face" looks as if he's asleep, very much like the "peacefully sleeping" portrait in a later chapter. However he died, Dumbledore was neither horrified nor afraid. Snape is quite capable, as we know, of casting nonverbal spells. If anyone could cast a nonverbal spell disguised as an Avada Kedavra, he could." I'm just wondering how, short of simply stating that JKR's descriptions, even of a spell as important as an AK, aren't always consistent, you or posters who agree with you would explain these differences, which surely at least *suggest* that something beyond what Harry sees *may* have been happening. And I didn't even mention the trickle of blood that Pippin maintains could not have happened after Dumbledore was dead. (Probably true, but is JKR familiar with forensics?) Carol, thinking that it would be interesting to explore the implications for both Harry and Snape if it were really the poison, not a real AK, that killed Dumbledore From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Wed Feb 21 23:58:08 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:58:08 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470702211558r717007c4j40d3ffb323a5572d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165291 > Eggplant: > > And then there is the revulsion and hatred etched into the harsh > lines of Snape's face as he murdered Dumbledore, that's a real problem > too; it just doesn't sound like a good Snape to me. > > Carol: But when have we ever > seen any such feeling for DD on Snape's part? Hickengruendler: I always thought the "hatred on revulsion" as a hint towards Dumbledore's man Snape. And the reason is exactly Carol's argument here. Why should Snape *hate* Dumbledore? I see no reason. Let's say Snape is indeed evil and fooled Dumbledore either all the time since his supposed return to the good side, or he switched sides again at some point and fooled Dumbledore since then. Then why should he hate him? Having disrepect at him, yes. Secretly grinning about that old trusting fool, maybe use the opportunity shortly before his death to gloat a bit. (We all know that Snape is far from being above such behaviour). But why should he hate him? That he killed Dumbledore is no prove of any hatred. Did Peter Pettigrew hate Cedric Diggory? Did Voldemort hate Frank Bryce or Bertha Jorkins? I don't think so. These people were killed because they way in the way/useless, and Voldemort wanted dispose of them. JKR did not overdo it here, in having Peter a look of revuslion of hatred in his face, when he killed Cedric. Because Peter has no reason to hate Cedric. Just as I see no reason for Snape hating Dumbledore. Quite in contrast, I would say. If Snape showed happy feeling the moment he killed old Albus, I would argue that it would speak much more against him, than the expression of revulsion on his face. Alla: That's easy though. Pure speculation obviously, but DD may have forced Snape to do something he did not want to do. Take your pick. Dumbledore may have some leverage over Snape when he forced him to keep his mouth shut after the Prank. Now we all know that Prank is a huge deal in the series, we also know that Snape revealed Lupin's condition the second he had a good chance to do so and not encounter DD wrath. OR Dumbledore may have forced Snape to go back to spying when he did not want to. Now that is of course more OFH! Snape or out for whatever reason Snape, than purely evil one, but still, would not Snape hate Dumbledore if he would want to leave Hogwarts and do whatever, when Dumbledore forces him to constantly risk his life? And now Snape has to go back to Voldemort permanently, because old fool just won't die. Again, those are obviously speculations, nothing more, but it is no problem for me at all to imagine that Snape hates DD. JMO, ------------------------ Jeremiah responds (with no hatred or revulsion in his eyes): When I read that sequence I wondered about what was going on through Snape's head. (Not that ever will figure out how JKR invented Snape's thought processes... They've got to be bizare and probably very angry...lol) However, I digress. I have always interpreted the moment not as a single event with Snape but with a silent dialogue between Snape and DD. I think they are communicating and since I believe in Snape's desire to rid the WW of LV (therefore DDM!Snape, kind of) I see DD revealing to Snape the knowledge of the Horcruxesas well as the events surrounding the last horcrux discovery. Snape, though loving the Dark Arts and respecting them, mostlikely reacted to the idea of a Horcrux the same way that RAB would have (i.e. with revulsion and a desire to destroy them). I think Snape was repulsed by the idea. That's the scenario I see running between DD and Snape. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 00:00:26 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 00:00:26 -0000 Subject: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165292 --- "sistermagpie" wrote: > > --- "Steve" wrote: > > > > Regarding the 'Harry Cheated in Potions' threads that > > are in progress. ... > > > > ... The implication is that he is cheating because > > he is taking credit for work that isn't his. > > > > But isn't that exactly what all the students are > > doing? Aren't they all working from Snape's > > instructions written on the board, or following a > > formula and procedure written in their own textbooks? > > How is what Harry doing any different than what all > > the students are doing, other that he is simply > > taking his formula and instructions from a different > > source. > > > > ... > > Magpie: > ... > > Anyway, that's why I think there's a reason this > subject is so up for debate. Harry's obviously not > "cheating" in the sense of having the answers to a > test written on his hand. He's usually doing exactly > what every other kid is doing in the class is doing in > terms of following a formula from a book to make a > Potion. But there are many ways that validate the > feeling that he's cheating--ways that I think Harry > would feel were cheating if Theodore Nott were doing > it, let's say. .... > > -m > bboyminn: Oohhh...what a wonderfully delicious reply. My...my... I hardly know where to begin. I did like what you said about brooms and Quidditch, and within a certain context, I agree. I may address that issue later, but in a sense, what I am about to say now, does also address that issue. This very much reminds me of my many Big Letter/little letter arguments in the past. There are /dark arts/ then again, there are /Dark Arts/, the two not necessarily being the same. There is /abuse/ and there is /Abuse/, the two not necessarily being the same. Well, in this case, and I'm sure much to your surprise, I agreee there is 'cheating' then again their is /Cheating/, the two not necessarily being the same. In the sense that it /feels/ like cheating I agree. In the sense that if the other students found out, they would call it 'cheating', I agree. But I don't think the teachers would consider it Cheating. If they found out, there might be some adjustments to classroom procedure, but no punishment for Harry. Keep in mind that Harry is actually good at Potions; no, he's not great, but he does produce the results he produces, and that is what he is being graded on. I suspect, if there were other true Potions Geeks in the class, they would have had many outside references, and would have improved on the textbook formulas themselves. This is why Herione infuriates me so. She knew there were better formulas, yet doggedly sticks with formulas she knows are bad. That's not the 'run to the Library' Hermione that I know and love. If she hadn't been so stubbornly /against/ that book. She would have gone to the Library and found a real authorized official book to help her rather than relying on some dodgy notes written in the margins of some old book. I feel the same about the other students. They could feel and suspect that Harry had some advantage, and smart students would have sought out an advantage of their own. But I don't get the sense that there are any /real/ Potions geeks in the class; people who have a very deep and real passion for potions. Even the best students, Hermione and Draco, are just there to pass the test and move on. They want good grades, but they don't have the passion to pursue the subject beyond the classroom. Harry on the other hand, does pursue the subject beyond the classroom. It's just that he doesn't really have to go very far or work very hard to achieve his advantage. Students do this all the time. The straight 'A' student are so, because they study hard and seek references beyond the textbook, so that they understand the subject, and always get top grades. Not that doesn't apply 100% to this class, because I get the sense that theory and versitility are not the goal. It seems to be a practical experience class; Learn to Brew by Brewing. The teacher simply gives them a formula, and they pratice making it, but again, method is incidental to outcome. If the RESULT is right, then the student has done well. As to the classroom Bezoar incident. It doesn't matter how or why Harry did what he did. What matters is the teachers evaluation of his result. Slughorn seemed very please with Harry's results, and unless my memory evades me, he even awardes some House Points. The assignment wasn't follow these rules, it was get this result. Now certainly Hermione, the other students, and the teacher saw that Harry hadn't done the work, but he has achieve the desired result and did so with available potion ingredients. What more can anyone ask. So, I'm sure the students were furious. As far as they are concerned, Harry 'cheated', but the teacher doesn't seem to think that Harry /Cheated/. In the sense that it feels like 'cheating' to the other students, it's true. But in the formal academic sense, it is not. Maybe now that I've rambled on for paragraphs, I can briefly touch on Harry's broom. If you take an idiot and put him in the fasted car, and take a racing genius and put him in a moderately crappy race car, it is likely that the racing genius will win the race. No car is ever faster that the driver who is driving it. That is true of brooms too. Harry's broom, though I'm not sure which one, is capable of Zero to 150 in 10 seconds. That doesn't mean 150 is the top speed, it's just the speed after 10 seconds of acceleration. The Quidditch pitch is pretty darn big, huge by most standards, but it is not 0 to 150 in 10 second of /dynamic free flight/ big. You can't make abrupt manuvers at 150 miles an hour clinging to the back of a stick. So, instinctive judgement, the ability of the rider to know his limits and to safely push himself near them are far more important than the absolute limits of the broom itself. Skill in the confined space of the Quidditch Pitch is far more important that raw speed or acceleration. So, NO, having a faster broom is of no advantage unless you have the skill to fly and control it. Just a whole lot more...more. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 01:36:55 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 01:36:55 -0000 Subject: Harry's "friend," the HBP (Was: Freud and JKR / Id vs. Superego ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165294 Carol earlier: > > From my point of view, Sectumsempra is about a boy on his way to becoming a Death Eater. "For Enemies" more than suggests that he has revenge on his mind. But Muffliato is just a charm to allow a kid to talk with his friends without being overheard. > > > Betsy Hp: > Exactly. I think the Prince started out as basically a good kid. He had a slightly dark sense of humor (like Harry), but wasn't seething with anger. But that changed, and I think Harry, going through similar emotions (it's interesting to track his evolving view of Snape through the books), easily follows the Prince's slide. So when Harry is in a place where he *wants* to strike out in anger at > someone, the Prince hands him the perfect weapon. Carol: Well, yes and no. I don't see any "slide." The hexes and spells other than Sectumsempra are no worse than the hexes that the students routinely throw at each other. The potions hints are completely innocuous and indicative of hard work and creative experimentation. And suddenly we have something very different, a Dark spell labeled "for enemies." It seems like a sudden change in focus to me, not a gradual slide toward the Dark side. Something, perhaps the Prank, caused the revenge that may have been simmering beneath the surface to take precedence over research and the HBP's slightly darkish sense of humor (as reflected in the Bezoar crack, for example). (And BTW, I think we can safely take for granted that he understood Golpalott's Law and would have had no trouble with the antidotes assignment. he was just being a smart a**.) Betsy Hp: > Hmmm... Well, first off I utterly refuse to see Snape as someone hungry for recognition (of the public kind anyway). The Order of Merlin thing is Lupin's bugaboo, and Lupin lies too easily for me to take *only* his word (especially his angry word) on something. I think Snape likes to be *right*, but that's a very seperate thing from recognition. Carol: Yes, I agree that the Order of Merlin wasn't as important to Snape as Lupin made it sound, but I still think he wouldn't have minded having it, and my feeling (only a feeling) is that he would have liked more recognition from Dumbledore as a kid. I always feel that he's a kind of stepbrother to the Marauders, and they, especially James, receive the recognition and appreciation that he'd like to receive (becoming Head Boy, for example, after the Prank and all those detentions without ever having been a Prefect). Notice how he looks forward to telling Dumbledore that he was right about the werewolf aiding and abetting the murderer in PoA. He wants Dumbledore to listen to him and acknowledge that he's right. He takes a lot of risks doing dangerous assignments with no recognition from anybody, and that's fine with him. But Dumbledore is different. He wants Dumbledore's approval and trust, and he believes (rightly, IMO) that he deserves it. More, I might add, than the secretive and sometimes outright dishonest Lupin, But, yes, absolutely, Snape likes to be right. No argument there. He just wants his "rightness" to be acknowledged by Dumbledore. > Betsy HP: > But second, I don't like putting Snape's choice to become a Death Eater onto other people's shoulders so much. I don't see this as poor innocent lamb Snape getting sucked in by the Death Eater wolves (like Pinocchio going off to "bad boy" land or whatever it was). I think Snape does have some responsibility for choosing to believe whatever story was fed him. And for letting his anger and resentment play such a role in his choosing. > Carol: Yes, of course. I didn't mean to imply that young Severus was an innocent lamb led astray. Absolutely, he was seething with rage at this time, and his interest in DADA may have been turning more toward the Dark Arts themselves. But he was also brilliant and powerful and multi-talented and just possibly ambitious, eager, probably, for recognition and acceptance. He had once been part of a gang of older Slytherins, almost certainly including Lucius Malfoy even though Sirius Black doesn't mention him, and just possibly he felt that his Slytherin friends, most of whom had become Death Eaters, would grant him the acceptance that he hadn't received from his schoolmates. And, given his age and his state of mind, he might have readily believed that Voldemort would grant him the recognition that Dumbledore, in his view, had not. None of which is to say that he didn't *choose* to join the Death Eaters or that he isn't responsible for that choice. Of course, he is. And that's important for the redemption process. He has to acknowledge his own responsibility before he can feel remorse, and I believe that he's done exactly that. Carol earlier: > > As for Harry, I agree that he's in danger of letting the desire for revenge control him. But that's not what Harry identifies with in the HBP's Potions book as far as I can tell. He's interested in the Prince's creativity and, sad to say, in getting credit for the Prince's work. > Betsy Hp: > See, I really think Harry's connection to the Prince went much deeper than that. Harry reads through the book whenever he has the spare time; he reads the book at night; he defends the book (or the Prince) to his friends; he protects the book (or the Prince) from his enemies. I really got the sense that this wasn't just a neat instruction book Harry stumbled across, this was someone who Harry was able to personally relate to. Which is why he was so painfully eager for the Prince to actually be his father. Carol: And yet there's nothing in the book, so far as we know, except Potions hints and notes for spells. I like the fact that he considered the Prince his friend and teacher, and the irony that the friend and teacher was Snape, but what is the basis for that connection? It seems to exist solely in Harry's mind because the Prince has "helped" him in Potions class when he would otherwise have been utterly at a loss what to do (the antidotes fiasco). Certainly, he owes Snape a debt of gratitude as both the HBP and the Potions master for teaching him about Bezoars. But what does he actually learn about the Prince, other than that he was brilliant and creative? Why does he empathize with him, when he himself is not a creative genius (though he easily master the spells)? Whatever it is, I don't think it's that they're both headed down a dark road. Sectumsempra is the only Dark, or even darkish, spell in the book. > > > >>Carol: > > (He can tell that the Prince is a boy, probably because more boys than girls are interested in hexes... > > Betsy Hp: > I seriously doubt Harry's understanding that the Prince was a boy was based on such reasoning. He does know Ginny after all. Carol: I forgot about Ginny. But she's not typical. (Think Lavender, Parvati, and Pansy, none of whom go around throwing hexes at people they dislike. Nor do Hermione and Luna. Ginny probably does so only because of overexposure to brothers, and the Twins in particular. Or because she's an obnoxious little--but I didn't say that.) And if that's not the reason Harry thought (knew) the HBP was a boy, what do you think it could have been? The Bezoar crack is the only hint of boyish humor in the book. And, of course, there's the fact that the HBP called himself the Half-Blood *Prince.* > Carol earlier: > > ...and because of the tone of the Bezoar remark, but I'm not sure that the Prince provides any personal information for Harry to identify with except on this general level. Harry can't even tell that the Prince is a Slytherin.) > > Betsy Hp: > I strongly disagree. There was enough there for Harry to personally identify with the Prince. The book was not just an instruction manual. (And of course Harry doesn't identify the Prince as Slytherin! Harry's got too much invested in denying his own Slytherin traits. ) Carol: Canon, please? We don't have *anything* except the Bezoar line, potions hints, and spells being worked out in the margins, and the "notation "for enemies." And if he knew or guessed that the HBP was a slytherin, he'd have dropped him like a hot potato. > > >Carol, who wonders if the HBP's teachers realized what a genius he was and guesses that Slughorn did but McGonagall didn't > > Betsy Hp: > Slughorn, definitely. Snape didn't get into the Slug Club based on breeding or charm. Carol: Ah, but there are people in this group who don't think that his presence at Slughorn's Christmas party and Slughorn's genial attitude toward him aren't sufficient evidence that he was in the Slug Club. I'm glad that you're not one of them. At least we agree on one point! Betsy Hp: I'd bet that McGonagall recognized his talents though. It wouldn't surprise me if most of the staff didn't see Snape as someone to watch. Carol: I don't know. I do see her in books one through four, at least, treating him as a respected colleague and equal, even following his lead in CoS regarding Lockhart, though some of the cordiality may have disappeared after she discovered that he'd been a Death Eater. (I think his politeness when she returnes from St. Mungo's is real, but their relations seems a bit formal. I could be mistaken, though.) But I'm talking about when he was at Hogwarts. He wasn't in her House and his specialties were different from hers. I'm sure he was talented in Transfiguration and everything else involving a wand, rather like Hermione, but we don't hear about it. Betsy Hp: And really, as far as that goes Snape proved them all right. Potions Master *and* Head of House at his age? Pretty well done, I think. Carol: Oh, absolutely. But that was Dumbledore's doing. I'm not questioning his talents or his brilliance for a moment. I'm just wondering whether his teachers recognized and encouraged his potential. He looked like a plant kept in the dark, remember. Someone should have given him sunshine and water. Carol, hoping that the middle portion of this post makes any sense at all since she was trying to listen, talk, think, and type at the same time From racingmoonbeams at hotmail.com Thu Feb 22 01:34:08 2007 From: racingmoonbeams at hotmail.com (eviljunglechicken) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 01:34:08 -0000 Subject: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165295 -Steve: > This is why Herione infuriates me so. She knew there were > better formulas, yet doggedly sticks with formulas she > knows are bad. That's not the 'run to the Library' > Hermione that I know and love. If she hadn't been so > stubbornly /against/ that book. She would have gone to > the Library and found a real authorized official book to > help her rather than relying on some dodgy notes written > in the margins of some old book. Maybe, I'm missing something here, but do we know that none of the other students went to the library. I find it rather hard to believe that the Ravenclaw students in this class didn't do so. Really hard to believe. Harry has a standard text with the addition of Snape's own improvements to its methods. What's to say that there is any source material generally available to all the students which contains the same? Steve: > > Harry on the other hand, does pursue the subject beyond > the classroom. It's just that he doesn't really have to > go very far or work very hard to achieve his advantage. > Students do this all the time. The straight 'A' student > are so, because they study hard and seek references > beyond the textbook, so that they understand the subject, > and always get top grades. I'm not sure I get what you mean by Harry pursuing this outside the classroom. The book with the better answers falls into his lap. Does he read through it outside of class...sure. But I imagine Hermione has her book memorized (probably before the year started)and takes it to bed with her at night. Steve: > > As to the classroom Bezoar incident. It doesn't matter > how or why Harry did what he did. What matters is the > teachers evaluation of his result. Slughorn seemed > very please with Harry's results, and unless my memory > evades me, he even awardes some House Points. The > assignment wasn't follow these rules, it was get this > result. Now certainly Hermione, the other students, > and the teacher saw that Harry hadn't done the work, > but he has achieve the desired result and did so with > available potion ingredients. What more can anyone > ask. I'd ask for a different teacher. >Steve: > Maybe now that I've rambled on for paragraphs, I can > briefly touch on Harry's broom. If you take an idiot > and put him in the fasted car, and take a racing > genius and put him in a moderately crappy race car, > it is likely that the racing genius will win the race. > No car is ever faster that the driver who is driving it. I'm thinking the other Quidditch players have some skill as they are a select group representing their houses rather than the Nevilles and Hermiones. If a person of comparable skill to another is put in a crappy race car, he would be at a disadvantage to his opponent in the faster car. If you are suggesting Harry so far outclasses everyone else, they have no hope to win, why (I ask you why JKR???) did the readers have to suffer through the then ridiculous drama of the Gryffindors worrying about winning games every book. *yawns* Steve: > That is true of brooms too. Harry's broom, though I'm > not sure which one, is capable of Zero to 150 in 10 > seconds. That doesn't mean 150 is the top speed, it's > just the speed after 10 seconds of acceleration. The > Quidditch pitch is pretty darn big, huge by most > standards, but it is not 0 to 150 in 10 second of > /dynamic free flight/ big. You can't make abrupt > manuvers at 150 miles an hour clinging to the back of > a stick. So, instinctive judgement, the ability of the > rider to know his limits and to safely push himself near > them are far more important than the absolute limits of > the broom itself. Skill in the confined space of the > Quidditch Pitch is far more important that raw speed > or acceleration. So, NO, having a faster broom is > of no advantage unless you have the skill to fly and > control it. Oh, I definitely agree Harry needs and has the skill to fly and control it. I read sistermagpie's post as being more about how many readers cry foul at the better brooms for the Slytherins and suddenly become silent when Harry receives his faster broom. In other words, how can a better broom be an advantage to a Slytherin and not be one to Harry unless Harry is the idiot example you offered. hee...as for your edifying comments above, the problem is I don't trust the author to know the same (difficulties with simple addition and subtraction evidenced more than once), although I apologize to her if she has mentioned this. Actually, after thinking this over, I reminded myself the brooms fly by magic. If players can cling to these sticks in the first place, why can't they make abrupt movements at 150 miles an hour? Which magical law are we breaking? eviljunglechicken From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 01:51:43 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 01:51:43 -0000 Subject: Leadership of the Order of the Phoenix Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165296 Indubitably this topic has been discussed before, but with the impending arrival of Deathly Hallows now may be a good time to revisit it. Pondering as I have over recent weeks the various alternative meanings of names and sources of the same I propose that Arthur Weasley himnself will emerge as the leader of the Order and play a significant role in distracting Voldemort from Harry's Horcrux quest. What led me to this was a connection made with our Arthur's name and the Iron Duke (which nickname incidentally only appears to have been given him because he had metal shutters on his hiome to keep away intruders). The Duke of Wellington, or Arthur Wesley as he was born, only changing later to Wellesley when the entire family did, has some interesting parallels with our Arthur. Both started at humble positions and rose (in our Arthur's case not fast) through the ranks to positions of authority. This may be why some thought our Arthur may one day become the Minister of Magic, whereas his true destiny lay elsewhere. The name similarlity is particularly interesting and was the first indicator to me that there may be somehting in this. The Iron Duke was the third son in his family and it may well be that our Arthur turns out to be the third son in his. Arthur has great enthusiasm and little fear of LV, which will be an asset for leadership. This is all I will write for now, but any who care to I would be pleased to discuss with here. Do I really need to go into who the Duke of Wellington was and what he achieved? Goddlefrood From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Feb 22 01:50:31 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 01:50:31 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165297 > Alla wrote: > > I do not remember **any** incidents in canon when person was > attacked with **fake** AK. I can misremember of course. Pippin: But the possibility *is* mentioned, by Fake!Moody, who says the whole class could point their wands at him and say the words and he doubted he'd get so much as a nosebleed. He says it doesn't matter, that he's not there to teach them how to do it. Unlike Sectumsempra then, this is a spell that has to be used in a certain way. Waving your wand wildly and saying the words won't cut it. And since it doesn't matter to the lesson being taught, nor to the plot of GoF, one has to ask, why did JKR put that line in at all? Why is it important for Harry, or us readers, to know that? > > > > Is it possible that it was **fake** AK? Sure. But sorry, I cannot > > agree that this is a straightforward reading anymore than I can agree > > that ESE!Lupin is a straightforward reading. Sorry. > Pippin: Parts of ESE!Lupin are not straightforward. OTOH, it is perfectly straightforward canon that Lupin was suspected of being the spy, that he tried to kill Pettigrew, that he withheld much more information from Dumbledore than he admitted to, and that he gives conflicting accounts of himself at several points in the story. It is possible to explain these things consonant with an innocent Lupin, but it requires just as much guesswork as ESE!Lupin does. Carol:. (Probably true, but is JKR familiar with forensics?) Pippin: She's certainly familiar with mystery stories. And the fact that dead people don't bleed was common knowledge long before CSI. Folklore had it that a murdered person's wounds would open and bleed afresh if the murderer approached. Canon itself notes that corpses, the inferi, do not bleed. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 02:14:15 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 02:14:15 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ A bit of evil Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165298 > > Alla wrote: > > > I do not remember **any** incidents in canon when person was > > attacked with **fake** AK. I can misremember of course. > > Pippin: > But the possibility *is* mentioned, by Fake!Moody, who says the whole > class could point their wands at him and say the words and he doubted > he'd get so much as a nosebleed. He says it doesn't matter, that he's > not there to teach them how to do it. Unlike Sectumsempra then, this > is a spell that has to be used in a certain way. Waving your wand wildly > and saying the words won't cut it. > > And since it doesn't matter to the lesson being taught, nor to the plot > of GoF, one has to ask, why did JKR put that line in at all? > > Why is it important for Harry, or us readers, to know that? Alla: He says that one basically needs the intent to complete spell, does he not? Isn't it more like foreshadowing of Harry's incomplete crucio? > Pippin: > Parts of ESE!Lupin are not straightforward. OTOH, it is perfectly > straightforward canon that Lupin was suspected of being the spy, > that he tried to kill Pettigrew, that he withheld much more information > from Dumbledore than he admitted to, and that he gives conflicting > accounts of himself at several points in the story. > > It is possible to explain these things consonant with an innocent > Lupin, but it requires just as much guesswork as ESE!Lupin does. Alla: No, sorry again, but I strongly disagree. I do **not** need any guesswork to explain these things in light of innocent Lupin, because none of those things makes me take a leap and say that it implies Evil Lupin. Sure, he was suspected as a spy, just as Sirius was. Does it show me in any way, shape or form that Lupin is a Voldemort's servant? No, no more than Sirius would be. It just shows me that there was a mistrust between Marauders, which I highly suspect was mostly Peter's doing, but I can be wrong of course. He tried to kill Pettigrew? Sure, tried to take revenge on traitor who brought them all so much grief? Sirius did as well. That really really does not lead me to believe that he is evil. He withhold information from Dumbledore? Sure he did - perfectly in line for me with that flaw that JKR described of Lupin - need to be liked. That does not lead me to believe that Lupin wants to be liked by Voldemort. Sorry. So, what I am trying to say? I believe to interpet canon the way you do and come up with ESE!Lupin requires series of complex interpretations. Which is not to say that JKR will not go for it of course. I mean, who can predict what she will do for sure. But nothing to me is straightforward in ESE!Lupin, nothing at all. By the way, to me not straightforward does not mean not supported by canon, it just means that you pick one of the several interpretations and the most complex one. I think I will stick with what I think as straightforward Lupin for now :) From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 22 02:22:04 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 21:22:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective References: Message-ID: <005901c75628$3f4add60$7872400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165299 bboyminn: > This is why Herione infuriates me so. She knew there were > better formulas, yet doggedly sticks with formulas she > knows are bad. That's not the 'run to the Library' > Hermione that I know and love. If she hadn't been so > stubbornly /against/ that book. She would have gone to > the Library and found a real authorized official book to > help her rather than relying on some dodgy notes written > in the margins of some old book. Magpie: It's crazy. I'm not even Hermione and I wouldn't accept working with inferior instructions. It's common sense. But then, Hermione's idea of genius often seems foreign to me. Steve: > I feel the same about the other students. They could > feel and suspect that Harry had some advantage, and > smart students would have sought out an advantage of > their own. But I don't get the sense that there are > any /real/ Potions geeks in the class; people who have > a very deep and real passion for potions. Even the > best students, Hermione and Draco, are just there to > pass the test and move on. They want good grades, but > they don't have the passion to pursue the subject > beyond the classroom. Magpie: Well, to be fair the other students *could* be doing that for all we know. But presumably if you're doing it from scratch it takes longer and you've got to do it with each Potion. The HBP went through lots of experimentation, perhaps after a Potion had first been introduced. I remember Ernie trying to do something creative in the class with just Harry, Draco and himself. He's trying to work out stuff using theory...it just doesn't work. Steve: > Harry on the other hand, does pursue the subject beyond > the classroom. It's just that he doesn't really have to > go very far or work very hard to achieve his advantage. > Students do this all the time. The straight 'A' student > are so, because they study hard and seek references > beyond the textbook, so that they understand the subject, > and always get top grades. Magpie: But Harry doesn't pursue the subject outside the classroom, unless we mean by subject "hexes I can try out on people in the hallways." He seems to have the same goal as the other kids, to do well in class. His interest is in the spells more than the Potions experiments. I don't ever remember him trying to make something on his own to see if it works right. He's more of a Charms man, it seems. It's possible that if the book had made Harry interested in Potions he might have brought himself up to the A level. But we know he doesn't. He himself mentions the drop in his ability when the book is gone. He hasn't really become better in Potions. He has added a lot of spells to his repetoire, though. That's the part he was studying outside of class. Steve > As to the classroom Bezoar incident. It doesn't matter > how or why Harry did what he did. What matters is the > teachers evaluation of his result. Slughorn seemed > very please with Harry's results, and unless my memory > evades me, he even awardes some House Points. The > assignment wasn't follow these rules, it was get this > result. Now certainly Hermione, the other students, > and the teacher saw that Harry hadn't done the work, > but he has achieve the desired result and did so with > available potion ingredients. What more can anyone > ask. Magpie: I've got to go with Hermione on this one. They're learning about Galpalott's Law (sp) and the challenge is to use it to brew an antidote. They're in a classroom learning about that principle. Even Harry himself says to Ron he couldn't share his trick because if two of them did it it would look stupid. Slughorn gives Harry points for cheek--I'd also add that Slughorn's favoritism towards Harry is OTT throughout the year, and the guy is always looking to praise him for things--he barely disguises his double standard in the way he treats students. I mean, I doubt Snape would have found it cute--even if one of his Slytherins did it. He would expect the person to learn the law he was actually teaching, and would probably make a point of saying that the bezoar meant the real challenge was too far beyond the student for him to even attempt it--which in this case was true. Still, Harry's not being dishonest there. Everyone sees what he does. They get the kind of "cheat" it is in that he's making it into a trick question instead of trying to work with the theory. I don't think there they think of Harry as cheating, since he was upfront about what he was doing...I would imagine they're just disgusted with his status in class. Steve: > So, I'm sure the students were furious. As far as they > are concerned, Harry 'cheated', but the teacher doesn't > seem to think that Harry /Cheated/. In the sense that > it feels like 'cheating' to the other students, it's > true. But in the formal academic sense, it is not. Magpie: Actually, I think Slughorn does think Harry cheated--he just thinks it's adorable. Cheeky lad knows his Potions so well he no doubt already knows how to do the real thing and he's Lily's Boy and one of the Slug Club. If the whole class had done it they probably would have had to have studied the law again the next day and really do it right. Steve: > Maybe now that I've rambled on for paragraphs, I can > briefly touch on Harry's broom. If you take an idiot > and put him in the fasted car, and take a racing > genius and put him in a moderately crappy race car, > it is likely that the racing genius will win the race. > No car is ever faster that the driver who is driving it. > > That is true of brooms too. Harry's broom, though I'm > not sure which one, is capable of Zero to 150 in 10 > seconds. That doesn't mean 150 is the top speed, it's > just the speed after 10 seconds of acceleration. The > Quidditch pitch is pretty darn big, huge by most > standards, but it is not 0 to 150 in 10 second of > /dynamic free flight/ big. You can't make abrupt > manuvers at 150 miles an hour clinging to the back of > a stick. So, instinctive judgement, the ability of the > rider to know his limits and to safely push himself near > them are far more important than the absolute limits of > the broom itself. Skill in the confined space of the > Quidditch Pitch is far more important that raw speed > or acceleration. So, NO, having a faster broom is > of no advantage unless you have the skill to fly and > control it. Magpie: Sure. But all the players can fly. It's not a case of Harry being a no-talent on a broom. He's talented enough to take advantage of a Firebolt in a way that would probably be lost on Hermione but not on Cedric. Harry's not *cheating* by using a better broom. Nobody thinks so. Players do sometimes comment on the advantage that he has, and he himself is aware of the difference in ride as well. It's just sometimes it seems to get into that area where there's this nervous feeling that Harry's broom shouldn't be judged the same way another player's excellent broom might be. I don't think it's a fear of cheating in this case, but like I described, this search for the "real talent" or "pure talent" that Harry should have, and that can't be sullied by superior equipment or advantages like that. -m From Vexingconfection at aol.com Wed Feb 21 23:25:19 2007 From: Vexingconfection at aol.com (Vexingconfection at aol.com) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:25:19 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's "friend," the HBP (Was: Freud and JKR / Id vs... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165300 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > The Prince, IMO, is all about animal need (or the id) at the point > > he invented that spell. This is a boy on his way to becoming a > > Death Eater, after all. > > > >>Carol: > From my point ov view, Sectumsempra is about a boy on his way to > becoming a Death Eater. "For Enemies" more than suggests that he has > revenge on his mind. But Muffliato is just a charm to allow a kid to > talk with his friends without being overheard. > Who thinks Harry is going to be evil as well? Almost everything that happens to him is because of his own disobedience. SS-he broke rules and went to a duel. CoS- he kidnapped a teacher and forced him into the chamber. PoA- he attacked another teacher and his aunt. Let's the man who murdered his parents go. GoF-cheated. OoP-He became the serpent, wanted to kill, disregarded orders from Dumbledore, gets Sirius Black killed, etc. HBP-he knowingly cheats, deceives-whatever-forces Dumbledore to drink the water, etc. Through all of this he threatens the Dursleys, sets a snake on his cousin, speaks parcel tongue. What if the next book-Harry becomes another Dark Lord? Also interesting is the fact that in the GOF-every prediction Harry makes comes true-Harry has always been afraid he would fit in better at Slytherin. Dumbledore tells him the only difference between he and Tom Riddle are the choices they made. Harry's choices don't always seem to be the best. Again-living proof opinion does not equal intelligence- please enlighten me. Vexies From muellem at bc.edu Thu Feb 22 03:33:59 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 03:33:59 -0000 Subject: Harry's "friend," the HBP (Was: Freud and JKR / Id vs... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165301 Vexingconfection at ... wrote: > > Who thinks Harry is going to be evil as well? Almost everything that happens > to him is because of his own disobedience. SS-he broke rules and went to a > duel. CoS- he kidnapped a teacher and forced him into the chamber. PoA- he > attacked another teacher and his aunt. Let's the man who murdered his parents > go. GoF-cheated. OoP-He became the serpent, wanted to kill, disregarded orders > from Dumbledore, gets Sirius Black killed, etc. HBP-he knowingly cheats, > deceives-whatever-forces Dumbledore to drink the water, etc. Through all of > this he threatens the Dursleys, sets a snake on his cousin, speaks parcel > tongue. What if the next book-Harry becomes another Dark Lord? Also interesting > is the fact that in the GOF-every prediction Harry makes comes true-Harry has > always been afraid he would fit in better at Slytherin. Dumbledore tells him > the only difference between he and Tom Riddle are the choices they made. > Harry's choices don't always seem to be the best. > Again-living proof opinion does not equal intelligence- please enlighten me. colebiancardi: yes, Harry does break a lot of rules, although he gets DD's approval in the end for breaking of said rules. I suppose if things didn't work out (mostly) in the favor of DD's Point of View, then I doubt he would have gotten that approval. Who knows? However, you do bring up the good point of the difference between him & Riddle - the choices. Whereas I believe Harry's choices, rule-breaking and all, were done not for himself, but to "save" others from harm. I also believe there is more than just the choices that DD mentioned. There are a lot of differences between Harry & Riddle from a young age in their personalities even though they had a horrible homelife at that time. And they didn't have the choice of who was raising them - Harry/Dursleys, Riddle/Orphanage(although Mrs Cole seemed like a very person, she was probably too busy to give Riddle the attention a child needs). Give me a minute and wait for it :) I need to bring up another thread. I think the reason why the cheating thread is still going strong is that we (the readers) want Harry to acknowledge his flaws and to grow and learn from it in a positive way. The slippery slope between good & evil is a fine one. A person may have noble intentions, but those intentions can led to becoming a dictator or in this case, a New Dark Lord. How does that saying go - the path to hell is paved with good intentions? One of Harry's saving graces is his own conscience - he does feel that using the HBP's book in Potions is not all in the up-and-up. He makes excuses to his friends, defending his position, but we do get the insight into his own personal thoughts on this matter - the guilt and the hiding of the book when Snape demands it. He knows, deep down inside, that it isn't "all right". He is embarrassed at Slughorn's praise at the Christmas party about his natural talent. He knows he isn't the genius that Slughorn makes him out to be. Harry's conscience will save him. His strong sense of right & wrong, and I do believe he has that sense, will prevent him from being the New Dark Lord. His concern for his friends and even those he is not close to - his empathy - will save him. Heck, he even felt empathy, short-lived as it was, for Snape in OotP. He feels empathy for Draco at the end of HBP. So, I believe he can overcome the darker side and not succumb to the temptations of being the One That Rules All. Riddle never, according to DD's insight, felt empathy for others. IMHO, Riddle reminds me of the thief that was only sorry that he got caught stealing, not that he stole. Harry doesn't strike me as that type of person, regardless of his apparent lack of concern for rules :) colebiancardi (hope this made sense) From moosiemlo at gmail.com Thu Feb 22 06:42:21 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 22:42:21 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: <005901c75628$3f4add60$7872400c@Spot> References: <005901c75628$3f4add60$7872400c@Spot> Message-ID: <2795713f0702212242q33d895a7g7481e612a151855e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165302 Magpie: It's crazy. I'm not even Hermione and I wouldn't accept working with inferior instructions. It's common sense. But then, Hermione's idea of genius often seems foreign to me. Lynda: You know, every time I read HBP, Hermione's attitute about the "official instructions" strikes me as more than oddly reminiscent of Anakin Skywalker in the last Star Wars movie. So determined to follow the established policies that it does not matter to her that there is a better way. Hopefully, Hermione does not go the same way as Anakin Skywalker. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From snapes_witch at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 08:19:59 2007 From: snapes_witch at yahoo.com (Elizabeth Snape) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:19:59 -0000 Subject: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165303 'Steve' bboymin wrote: > > True that is speculation, but Snape never really assigns > at textbook. There are two books assigned in First Year. > One is a general reference, '1,001 Magical Herbs and > Fungi' and another whose exact nature isn't known. It > could be a book of Theory of Potions Making, it > could be a beginner's book of potion recipes, or it could > be 'History of Potions Making'. None the less, that second > book is never referenced or used again. Snape has all the > recipes in his head, or in his personal notes, and all > classes are based on those notes. He writes the days > instruction on the blackboard, and the test is NOT 'do > you know the recipe' but can you follow the instructions > accurately enough to produce the desired result. > Snape's Witch replies: Out of curiosity I rechecked the first year booklist (SS, pg. 66, trade ppbk), and believe that 'One Thousand Magical Herbs and Fungi' by Phyllida Spore is actually the Herbology textbook. Why this book comes to Harry's mind beats me, but might merely show an 11 yr. old boy's disinterest in gardening!! 'Magical Drafts and Potions' by Arsenius Jigger is the textbook for Potions and sounds to me like a basic recipe book. I agree that Snape never actually uses it, and doesn't appear to assign another book for later classes. From bercygirl2 at aol.com Thu Feb 22 08:35:15 2007 From: bercygirl2 at aol.com (bercygirl2) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:35:15 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165304 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol earlier: > > > There is no saving Dumbledore, who would have been killed by the > Death Eaters if Snape or the poison (or Draco under coercion) hadn't > killed him. > > > Eggplant responded: > > But of course if Snape hadn't taken that vow he could have turned > his wand onto the Death Eaters instead of Dumbledore. It all goes back > to that vow. Your central problem is explaining why a good Snape would > make that crazy vow; and whatever the explanation you come up with it > needs to be HUGE to justify such bizarre behavior. I explained in a previous post (# 161643) why I'm convinced that Snape did NOT make the Vow. If he is left-handed, and the Vow must be made with the wand hand, then it was never made at all. Harry did not notice what hand Snape used when he performed the Avada keKedavra on the tower. What if Snape didn't use his wand to do it? What if Dumbledore had already died at that point? Snape could have said "Avada Kedavra" while pointing his wand at Dumbledore with his right hand, and levitated him off the tower with a non verbal spell. bercygirl2 From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Thu Feb 22 13:30:39 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 13:30:39 -0000 Subject: FILK: It Appears I Have Been Tapped, Then Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165305 It Appears I Have Been Tapped, Then To the tune of Rising Early in the Morning, from Gilbert and Sullivan's The Gondoliers (this is a patter song, in the mode of the famed Penzance Major-General) Here is a MIDI: http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/gondoliers/web_opera/gond12.html THE SCENE: Harry's debut as the Captain of the GQT HARRY: It appears I have been tapped, then, Once Ms. Johnson did retire As the brand-new Quidditch Captain, To exhort and to inspire. For `tis the Captain's path Lets me in the Prefects' bath . First, I make some formal notice I have written to promote us That announces when our tryouts should occur. Then, I hear a plea from Katie Which is solemn, strong and weighty, "By default do not let last year's team recur." Next I move so to reserve the Quidditch pitch So we have a place to practice with the Snitch For it is my duty to evaluate Ev'ry Gryffindoran Quidditch candidate. Then I chase away a loopy Squad of Hufflepuff girl groupies, Well as giggling Ravenclaw gals who arrive here by the ton. (Here's the scoop I got from Hermy, As she hastens to assure me That the fangirls have come flocking to gawk at the Chosen One). Then the trials start in earnest, My expression at its sternest, Till I motion to dismiss them and remove them from my sight All the fangirls stay to titter As the broomsticks crash and flitter Bringing down the feeble Firsties who can barely stay in flight. Angelina may complain Mr. Wood display some strain But the leadership of Quidditch is a positive delight But it's slightly aggravating When I'm forced to start berating And dismiss the feeble Firsties who can barely stay in flight Angelina may complain Mr. Wood display some strain But the leadership of Quidditch is a positive delight But it's slightly aggravating When I'm forced to start berating And dismiss the feeble Firsties who can barely stay in flight In the tryouts for the Chasers Ginny lets no one displace her, Katie Bell and Ms. Demelza do the same Then I designate the Beaters, Jimmy Peakes flies like a meteor, And though Coote looks weedy, he has skilful aim. Then the candidates for Keeper I inspect And my old pal Ron is quite the nervous wreck The crowd I thought by now would have dispersed But its mockery and size get worse and worse Ron is up against a sore hack Going by the name of Cormac He's a boasting braggadocio with a shoulder for his chip But his try is not so great, he Scores a percentage of eighty And he shows himself quite lacking in agility and zip. Ron's triumphant in his tryout Let Cormac in his rage fly out, For he does not dare to cross me or my line drawn in the sand. Though with joy Ron's face is flushing I observe that Hermy's blushing Over using a Confundus Charm to lend a helping hand. Oh, Angelina may complain Mr. Wood display some strain But the leadership of Quidditch put me firmly in command But I cannot understand it When Hermione's underhanded In employing a Confundus Charm to lend a helping hand. - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Thu Feb 22 13:06:36 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:06:36 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: <2795713f0702212242q33d895a7g7481e612a151855e@mail.gmail.com> References: <005901c75628$3f4add60$7872400c@Spot> <2795713f0702212242q33d895a7g7481e612a151855e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001801c75682$500dfe20$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165306 --Magpie Wrote-- >>>It's crazy. I'm not even Hermione and I wouldn't accept working with inferior instructions. It's common sense. But then, Hermione's idea of genius often seems foreign to me.<<< --Lynda Wrote-- >>>You know, every time I read HBP, Hermione's attitute about the "official instructions" strikes me as more than oddly reminiscent of Anakin Skywalker in the last Star Wars movie. So determined to follow the established policies that it does not matter to her that there is a better way. Hopefully, Hermione does not go the same way as Anakin Skywalker. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- I totally agree with both of you. The thing that really gets me is that Hermione seems completely out of character all throughout HBP. She is on her moral high horse about Harry using the Prince's notes, yet she herself writes his homework for him at times, knowing that Ron will also copy HER work. She helps Ron onto the Quiditch team by confounding McLaggen. Yet, she took an attitude with Harry again when she thought he'd spiked Ron's drink with Felix Filicus. Not that she wouldn't do these sorts of things any other year, but in contrast with her attitude towards Harry's using the book, it's just completely out of character. Her relentless nagging doesn't let up all year about the book and the way she dismisses Harry's theories about Malfoy after she has followed him herself in Diagon alley and watched him, up to no good. The Hermione we know from the first 5 volumes would never have acted this way. She may have disapproved, but would have eventually let it go and most likely spent time in the library trying to figure out a. Who is the Half Blood Prince? and b. Why do these instructions work so well? She might even have made her own set of notes about the notes in an attempt to improve upon them. >From her attitude towards Harry in HBP, I was expecting to learn of a secret crush she was harboring for Harry. But there's really no explanation outside of she was not handled well by the author in this book or since she has a problem with just about everything Harry does, but when she does something similar it's ok, she's just got some serious personal issues. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Vexingconfection at aol.com Thu Feb 22 12:48:33 2007 From: Vexingconfection at aol.com (Vexingconfection at aol.com) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:48:33 EST Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165307 In a message dated 2/22/2007 7:41:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, bercygirl2 at aol.com writes: Harry did not notice what hand Snape used when he performed the Avada Kedavra on the tower. What if Snape didn't use his wand to do it? What if Dumbledore had already died at that point? Snape could have said "Avada Kedavra" while pointing his wand at Dumbledore with his right hand, and levitated him off the tower with a non verbal spell. bercygirl2 Vexingconfection: I would love to see Snape innocent-I just don't think it's gonna happen-but I do think that Snape could have pointed his wand elsewhere. Why would Harry have been released from Dumbledores spell at that exact moment though? From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Feb 22 14:52:06 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:52:06 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective Message-ID: <32664064.1172155926489.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165308 Lynda: >You know, every time I read HBP, Hermione's attitute about the "official >instructions" strikes me as more than oddly reminiscent of Anakin Skywalker >in the last Star Wars movie. So determined to follow the established >policies that it does not matter to her that there is a better >way. Hopefully, Hermione does not go the same way as Anakin Skywalker. Bart: In real life, when my mother was sick from antibiotics, my wife told her to take yogurt. In spite of all the literature on the subject, she would not touch yogurt until it was recommended to her by her doctor. There's a saying, "There is an inverse relationship between's someone's insistence on use of a title and their confidence in their fitness to have it." While authority has its place, some people are too hung up on it. Bart From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 15:49:50 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:49:50 -0000 Subject: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: <005901c75628$3f4add60$7872400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165309 bboyminn wrote: > > This is why Herione infuriates me so. She knew there were better formulas, yet doggedly sticks with formulas she knows are bad. That's not the 'run to the Library' Hermione that I know and love. If she hadn't been so stubbornly /against/ that book. She would have gone to the Library and found a real authorized official book to help her rather than relying on some dodgy notes written in the margins of some old book. > > Magpie: > It's crazy. I'm not even Hermione and I wouldn't accept working with inferior instructions. It's common sense. But then, Hermione's idea of genius often seems foreign to me. > Carol responds: Yes, but what Hermione does is a side issue. It has nothing to do with the rightness or wrongness of Harry's behavior, and she's absolutely right that Harry is getting credit for someone else's work, for Potions brilliance he doesn't have, and that it's unfair to the students who *do* know what they're doing and work hard to achieve their results. It's also unfair to Harry's dear friend (or future friend, if we look at the first lesson), the Half-Blood Prince. Harry is accused in GoF of stealing Cedric's glory, Snape in the HPB of trying to steal Draco's. What else is Harry doing if not stealing the HBP's glory, taking credit for his experiments, his research, his brilliance? Granted, Slughorn's favoritism makes this false view of Harry's genius possible, but Harry is still a fake. (BTW, Slughorn's glorified view of Harry makes me distrust his memory of dear cheeky Potions natural Lily as well, but now I'm the one who's sidetracked.) Harry is not a Potions genius. The Potions genius is Snape, pure and simple. No wonder Snape called him a liar and a cheat. He knew exactly where those brilliant ideas came from, and it was not from Harry's head or his experimentation. He did no research. He only used the HBP's notes to get better results than everyone else. As for Hermione, her hesitation to use the HBP's notes probably stems from the fact that she doesn't know who he is, and the incident with the diary and Ginny may have something to do with it. But I think that Hermione simply believes that the official instructions are correct. She trusts published books (with the partial exception of the "Revised History of Hogwarts"). She looks up *facts* and *information* in the library. Hermione easily follows instructions, memorizes information, understands theory. But she isn't creative. She doesn't research potions *improvements* or (IIRC) invent spells. She's very by the book. At any rate, I think it's odd to judge Hermione for not doing what she perceives is dishonest. But it's also beside the point. If Harry really cared about Potions and about learning and about intellectual honesty, he'd share those marginal notes with Slughorn, who in turn would share them with the class. Then they'd all be working with the improved directions, and those who followed the directions exactly would get perfect results. It would even be a lesson to the class to show them that someone had worked outside of class to improve the directions in the textbook, encouraging those who really cared about Potions and learning (Hermione, perhaps, or Ernie Macmillan?) to do the same. Carol, who sees no advantage for Harry in using the HBP's notes except *unearned* high marks since he still doesn't understand the theory and can't attain the same results when the book is hidden in the RoR From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Feb 22 16:20:49 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:20:49 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165310 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > This very much reminds me of my many Big Letter/little > letter arguments in the past. > Well, in this > case, and I'm sure much to your surprise, I agreee there > is 'cheating' then again their is /Cheating/, the two not > necessarily being the same. Geoff: Having followed this thread at a discreet distance for some time, I thought I would just drop in a couple of thoughts from the real world. When I was in the Upper Sixth at school and taking my GCE A-level in Chemistry, there was a practical test involved. To this exam, we were recommended to bring our practical notebooks from the year as it was too difficult to try to commit all the various procedures to memory, particualrly in qualitative analysis. These books contained our own written notes and many of us had added sentences because we had discussed them with fellow students and examples of 'best practice' which some of us had worked out individually were passed among ourselves. Yeras later, when I was teaching A-level Maths, questions often included the phrase "hence or otherwise.." In other words, use the results you have already obtained to complete the next bit of the question or produce your own method. Lateral thinking was encouraged; as a teacher, if possible I would discuss more than one way of tackling a problem with a class.The idea was to (a) produce a correct answer and (b) seek to do it by the best means possible. Harry has used the book to produce good results. As has been observed, he has had the ability to translate the information in the book into the correct end-product and that has involved his own skill. You can give me a detailed recipe book and I will still make a pig's ear of the resulting meal... as can Neville. When I was a Head of Computer Education, I used to attend inter-school training days at intervals and the most useful parts of these were often the time spent at the lunch table when we would discuss problems and methods among ourselves and would often come back with ideas and methods to use. I have often modified programs beyond where the original author had reached and have known folk do the same for my ideas. We had no objection to our ideas being incorporated into other teacher's work; in fact, it was considered quite a compliment. In the above context, Harry was probably working within the constraints which I had known. However, I suppose we have to take on board the fact that he was also trying a little one-upmanship against Hermione so maybe a small letter "cheating" is called for and not a capital letter example. But does he feel that he might be infringing the "Prince's" copyright or is he, in his own view, merely 'asking' a friend for help? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 16:28:44 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:28:44 -0000 Subject: Harry's "friend," the HBP (Was: Freud and JKR / Id vs... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165311 colebiancardi wrote: > > yes, Harry does break a lot of rules, although he gets DD's approval in the end for breaking of said rules. However, you do bring up the good point of the difference between him & Riddle - the choices. Whereas I believe Harry's choices, rule-breaking and all, were done not for himself, but to "save" others from harm. I also believe there is more than just the choices that DD mentioned. There are a lot of differences between Harry & Riddle from a young age in their personalities even though they had a horrible homelife at that time. And they didn't have the choice of who was raising them - Harry/Dursleys, Riddle/Orphanage(although Mrs Cole seemed like a very person, she was probably too busy to give Riddle the attention a child needs). > Carol responds: In general, I agree with you. The first thing Harry does on the Hogwarts Express in his first year is make a real friend, which Tom Riddle never does. And, of course, Harry isn't conducting research to prove that he's the Heir of Slytherin so that he can open up the Chamber of Secrets and continue "Salazar Slytherin's noble work." He hasn't murdered four people and started researching Horcruxes at sixteen. And *some* of the rules he's broken were broken to help others. However, brewing Polyjuice Potion (actually Hermione's idea) was intended to expose Draco Malfoy as the Heir of Slytherin (oops) and using the Marauder's Map and his Invisibility Cloak to get into Hogsmead without permission was solely for his own entertainment. And using the HBP's notes, though it didn't break any rules, was for his own unearned advancement (high marks and praise from the teacher) at the expense of the students who actually deserved those marks and that praise, Hermione included (not to mention his dear friend, the Prince, who actually deserved credit for his own research, just as a real student would cite a source in a research paper). Colebiancardi: > I think the reason why the cheating thread is still going strong is that we (the readers) want Harry to acknowledge his flaws and to grow and learn from it in a positive way. The slippery slope between good & evil is a fine one. A person may have noble intentions, but those intentions can led to becoming a dictator or in this case, a New Dark Lord. How does that saying go - the path to hell is paved with good intentions? Carol: Exactly. A hero (or the protagonist of a Bildungsroman) has to acknowledge and learn from his own mistakes. So far, Harry doesn't seem to be doing that. Even when he acknowledges the mistakes to himself, they get glossed over or turned into something else (rather than losing the Second Task because he misunderstood it and thought that Dumbledore would put little Gabrielle Delacour and the others in real danger, Harry gets points for "moral fiber." Rather than thinking over the consequence of his thoughtless use of a dangerous Dark spell, he gets sidetracked into protecting his precious Potions book. Rather than acknowledging that he should not have believed that Voldemort could capture Sirius Black and hold him hostage in the MoM, he blames Snape for Black's death.) I'm waiting, Harry. Waiting for you to accept the responsibility for your own mistakes and learn from them. > Colebiancardi: > One of Harry's saving graces is his own conscience - he does feel that using the HBP's book in Potions is not all in the up-and-up. He makes excuses to his friends, defending his position, but we do get the insight into his own personal thoughts on this matter - the guilt and the hiding of the book when Snape demands it. He knows, deep down inside, that it isn't "all right". He is embarrassed at Slughorn's praise at the Christmas party about his natural talent. He knows he isn't the genius that Slughorn makes him out to be. Carol: Where else have we seen a character who has a conscience but doesn't act on it? Remus Lupin, anyone? He knows that he should act the part of Prefect and stop his friends from publicly humiliating Severus Snape and hexing everyone who annoys them, but he doesn't do it. He knows that he should tell Dumbledore that Sirius Black is an Animagus (not to mention that he knows several secret passageways into the castle or grounds) but he doesn't do it. Lupin is at best weak, a good man who does nothing. And surely that's not what we want our hero to be. Nor do we want him to be a Sirius Black, recklessly rushing into danger regardless of consequences. He needs to put the two together and think before he acts, not to mention accepting the consequences when he makes a mistake. > Coelbiancardi: > Harry's conscience will save him. His strong sense of right & wrong, and I do believe he has that sense, will prevent him from being the New Dark Lord. His concern for his friends and even those he is not close to - his empathy - will save him. Heck, he even felt empathy, short-lived as it was, for Snape in OotP. He feels empathy for Draco at the end of HBP. So, I believe he can overcome the darker side and not succumb to the temptations of being the One That Rules All. Carol: I agree. He's starting to see others more clearly, Neville and Luna in particular, and to develop true empathy as opposed to that saving-people impulse which doesn't really see others as people, only as victims in need of being rescued. The touch of pity (not empathy, IMO) for Draco, whom he has always despised, is very important. Maybe he'll revisit the Sectumsempra scene in his mind and even see it from Draco's perspective, with Hermione's help. And somehow, somehow, he'll come to understand and forgive and even empathize with Severus Snape by the end of DH, understanding that he, too, has been trapped by Voldemort into doing what he otherwise would never have done, killing Albus Dumbledore (rather than allowing the DEs to force Draco to do it or die). Parseltongue and Slytherin tendencies (not always bad) to the contrary, Harry is no Tom Riddle. But he hasn't yet learned to feel compassion for the entire WW or to acknowledge his own mistakes and imperfections and try to overcome them. If he feels a twinge of conscience, he should realize that what he's done or is doing or is tempted to do is wrong and stop doing it or take responsibility for the consequences. That's what growing up is all about. It's important for all the young characters, but especially for Harry, who bears the heavy burden of saving the WW from the personification of its own worst tendencies, Lord Voldemort. Carol, wondering if the HBP's Potions book will come back into play in DH and, if so, how From muellem at bc.edu Thu Feb 22 16:34:41 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:34:41 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165312 "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > In the above context, Harry was probably working within the > constraints which I had known. However, I suppose we have to > take on board the fact that he was also trying a little > one-upmanship against Hermione so maybe a small letter > "cheating" is called for and not a capital letter example. But does > he feel that he might be infringing the "Prince's" copyright or is > he, in his own view, merely 'asking' a friend for help? colebiancardi: all of the things you have mentioned are just fine and acceptable. However, if a professor stated what an absolute genius I was, what a natural talent I am, when in fact, all I did was use someone else's notes, someone else's final solution, and did nothing but follow those notes, that I would be a fake. The cheating part, for me, has nothing to do with the one-upmanship with Hermione, but the fact that Harry doesn't correct Slughorn nor shows any interest in "WHY" the HBP did things the way he did. Asking a friend for help is one thing, but to take credit for what your friend did is another. and yes, IMHO, Harry took credit for it. colebiancardi From cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com Thu Feb 22 16:48:07 2007 From: cassyvablatsky at hotmail.com (Unspeakable) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:48:07 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1- In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165314 > Cassy: POA: Well, the result of Snape *totally* losing it in the Shrieking Shack is that the real culprit, Wormtail, escaped... to rejoin Voldemort. Sirius Black is (still) the Most Wanted, Remus Lupin is a disgraced werewolf and Fudge thinks that Dumbledore employs deranged staff. Nice one, Severus... still it's good to know you're (supposed to be) on our side! > Nikkalmati: This statement really has me puzzled. Lupin and Sirius are about to tell their story, Snape comes in and some things about their past and his character are revealed, Snape is knocked out, the Marauders continue their story, convince the Trio, and all leave the Shack. Snape's arrival interrupts the flow of the story, but nothing happened in the Shack or afterwards that would not have happened, if Snape had not come out after Lupin, except that Snape rescues unconscious Harry, Sirius and Hermione. > Cassy: With apologies to Severus Snape, whom I agree did the right thing in conjuring the stretchers to save Harry, Ron and Hermione (and Black!) from the Dementors; my point is that if Snape had played it differently in the Shack, he could have captured Wormtail that night ... and he knows it. IMHO, it's terribly tragic that Snape, Lupin & Black were unable to understand one another sooner ... a cornered rat (even one so catastrophically underestimated as Pettigrew) should have been no match for three powerful members of the Order of the Phoenix, even without the (not inconsiderable) talents of the teenage trio. Yet they failed ... (as the Marauders had failed before) ... and this time, Snape was in a large measure responsible for the failure. I have no wish to malign DDM!Snape (whom I admire greatly following HBP) but it's hard to overstate the magnitude of the disaster here ... "You ? you've got to hear me out," he [Black] croaked. "The rat ? look at the rat ?" (POA19) This was the dangerous corner, if you like, the moment when one future was lost: "The Dark Lord lies alone and friendless, abandoned by his followers. His servant has been chained these twelve years. Tonight, before midnight ... the Servant will break free and set out to rejoin his Master. The Dark Lord will rise again with his servant's aid, greater and more terrible that ever he was. Tonight ... before midnight ... the servant will set out to rejoin his Master...". Now we know that the prophecy did not *have* to come true. Pettigrew's escape made Voldemort's return possible and Pettigrew's escape was only possible because Snape failed to listen to Sirius & Lupin and to unite with them at this moment. If he had done so then (even with the added complications of lycanthropy and the Dementors), I have little doubt that Wormtail would now be in Azkaban. Of course, there are some major justifications for Snape's behaviour in POA19. One could ask: why should he listen to Lupin & Sirius? He is rightly concerned for the students' safety, 'out of bounds , in the company of a convicted murderer and a werewolf'; he blames Sirius for the Potters' deaths with an intensity of feeling matched only by Harry in the last-but-one chapter (thus supporting the hypothesis that he loved Harry's mother); and he believes Sirius to be capable of murder for the very good reason that (as Snape says) "he [Sirius] once tried to kill *me*". (To add to which: he apparently believes that HRH have been the victim of a Confundus Charm.) However, I would argue that JKR also points to Snape's culpability in this scene. There is evidence that he is too strongly motivated by a desire for revenge (and for personal vindication from Dumbledore), which leads him to take maverick action without reasonable precautions (why oh why did he not send a Patronus to DD before rushing to the Shack?): "I've told the Headmaster again and again that you've been helping your old friend Black into the castle ... I shall be quite interested to see how Dumbledore takes this ... Vengeance is sweet ... How I hoped I would be the one to catch you ...". In a shocking moment, Snape even threatens to "call the Dementors once we get out of the Willow" though thankfully (after being knocked out) his sense of justice reasserts itself. We know that Harry, Ron & Hermione were starting to come round to Black & Lupin's version of events before Snape appeared, but the evidence suggests that Snape could not even begin to make the necessary mental adjustments. (After all, Harry Potter has every reason to hate the godfather whom he thinks betrayed his parents ... and yet *Harry* does ultimately listen to reason.) There is no sign that Snape had benefited from a year in Lupin's company or that he was prepared to credit DD's trust in Lupin (though this is not wholly his fault). Most telling, perhaps, is the language that JKR uses to convey Snape's (precarious) mental state in POA19: 'quite deranged', 'mad glint', beyond reason', 'madder than ever' etc. In the circumstances, HRH have little option but to subdue him ... with the effect that Snape is 'still hanging, unconscious, in mid-air' when Lupin transforms, Sirius defends the trio & Wormtail escapes. This is hardly the part that gallant DDM!Snape would have wished to play in events. (My point is not that Snape is evil but that *had* he been serving Voldemort at the time, he could hardly have done worse ... a point JKR uses to her advantage in HBP.) Of course, Snape was not alone in believing that Sirius Black was guilty (though interestingly, he seems to have been one of the only people to suspect Black *before* the events at Godric's Hollow), nor was he privy to the crucial first half of the conversation between Black, Lupin & HRH in POA17/18, but his refusal to listen cost them dearly all the same. What is clear is that he acted in good faith ? I don't for a moment believe that he was playacting to save Wormtail. After all, we know how anxious he was to have been *right*: "You surely don't believe a word of Black's story?" Snape whispered, his eyes fixed on Dumbledore's face. (POA21) And after Black's escape, he is 'beside himself'. So what would Snape's reaction have been to his debriefing from Dumbledore at the end of POA? To the knowledge that he has a) unwittingly aided Voldemort's servant to escape, b) so helping to fulfill a prophecy of Voldemort's return, c) allowed Voldemort's spy, *Wormtail*, to witness his immoderate fury, d) almost sent an innocent man to a fate he would not have wished on his worst enemy and e) potentially involved Dumbledore, Harry etc. in serious (no pun intended!) trouble with the Ministry? Of all the 'unseen scenes' so far, this is the one I would have most desired to witness since it would settle the question of Snape's loyalties once and for all! I think he would have been appalled. And for all the extenuating circumstances, he would have blamed himself. Sometimes, IMHO, Snape is not well served by his apologists ... in this case, I think we need to acknowledge his level of responsibility, not to blame Snape, but in order to understand the resultant anguish which drives his actions in subsequent books. If Snape had ever hesitated on that memorable night in GOF36 when he set out to rejoin & deceive Voldemort, then the shame & humiliation of Wormtail's escape would have strengthened his resolve, IMHO. And now he has to live with Wormtail in Spinner's End, as a permanent reminder of what should have been ... > wynleaf I read a lot of Cassy's website and notice that she believes Snape will die and Harry will forgive Snape as he dies. ... Harry can forgive Snape in a dying!Snape scene. But it takes time to build trust. So I think that Harry will have some time over the course of DH to overcome his hatred, forgive Snape, *and* learn to trust him. So no forgiveness while Snape is dying -- it's too quick. > Cassy: Actually, I agree with you! I'm just not sure ? given the fact that JKR has so much to resolve, when it comes to destroying Horcruxes, defending Hogwarts & defeating Voldemort etc. ? that we'll be able to & *see* Harry & Snape together much in DH. They have very different paths to follow now, IMHO ... In fact, I doubt we'll see them together until near the end ... though I suspect the question of Snape's loyalty will be resolved quite early on *for the reader*, separating us from the main protagonists once again: http://book7.co.uk/one/ ... I used to favour a huge d?nouement scene between Snape and Harry, at wand-tip, with some startling new information being revealed to explain Snape's role in HBP, but I now believe that Dumbledore will have found some way of communicating the essential fact of Snape's innocence to Harry *before* Snape & Harry meet again. In case you're wondering, it involves time-travel between HBP & DH: http://book7.co.uk/nine/ So instead I envisage a climatic scene in which Voldemort unmasks Snape and leaves him for dead, with Harry (and Lupin?) arriving too late to save him, but in time to learn some crucial information from Snape. (In these circumstances, Harry would genuinely regret Snape's death and attempt to offer him absolution. Snape would be content to die, if he could tell Harry the location of the last Horcrux before expiring.) But to prevent this being another Aragorn/Boromir moment, I see Snape's final revelation as very troubling for Harry: http://book7.co.uk/fourteen/ > Carol: ... Snape's death could serve no purpose. I hope I'll step on no toes when I say that Sirius Black was a character without a future but Snape is another matter. > Cassy: Oh dear! At the risk of being unpopular, I see Snape's storyline as steadily building towards a climatic atonement from which there is no way back. (& I think he's too integral to the plot to have received a last minute reprieve.) He strikes me as already posthumous ... 'past oriented' as LL has said. Ironically, Wormtail for whom I feel nothing, is the one I'd nominate to survive unclich?d(!) as he really needs to *start* coming to terms with what he's done, IMHO (he hasn't earned redemption & I don't believe his 'debt' will be so easily paid: http://book7.co.uk/fifteen/) ... Snape knows & that's enough. Probably, after HBP, Snape envies Sirius the 'easier' death in the field ... & I think that's probably what awaits him in the end ... however, torturous the road. (For what it's worth, I think it *will* be torturous (involving Bellatrix & Malfoy etc.) but that ultimately Snape will lose his life in the heroic, decisive action which he has always craved (& I think he will break Voldemort's wand!) Cassy V. http://book7.co.uk/ evidence-based synopsis From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 16:53:33 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:53:33 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165315 bercygirl wrote: > I explained in a previous post (# 161643) why I'm convinced that Snape did NOT make the Vow. If he is left-handed, and the Vow must be made with the wand hand, then it was never made at all. > > Harry did not notice what hand Snape used when he performed the Avada keKedavra on the tower. What if Snape didn't use his wand to do it? What if Dumbledore had already died at that point? Snape could have said "Avada Kedavra" while pointing his wand at Dumbledore with his right hand, and levitated him off the tower with a non verbal spell. Carol responds: Having snape not take the vow removes all the tragic irony of his situation and makes nonsense of the twitch and the hellish imagery of fire and bonds at the end of the "Spinner's End" chapter. It removes his terrible choice of kill Dumbledore or die. Nor is there any canon in the books to indicate that he is left-handed or that the vow would not take effect if he were. It is quite possible, however, for him to have cast a nonverbal spell along with or instead of the spoken Avada Kedavra, allowing Dumbledore to die from the poison rather than from the spell. The vow wouldn't know the difference, and he would appear to have killed Dumbledore since Dumbledore was dead, anyway. But *if* that's the case, and Snape's mental anguish when Harry calls him a coward seems to indicate otherwise, there's still no need to disregard the vow or to produce uncanonical speculation to strip it of its validity and the whole UV motif of its significance. And can you clarify what you mean by "What if Dumbledore had already died at that point"? Carol, who (needless to say) does see the possibility that Snape levitated DD off the tower and is still asking others to explore the implications of that possibility without taking the UV out of the equation From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 22 16:55:34 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:55:34 -0000 Subject: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165316 > > Magpie: > > It's crazy. I'm not even Hermione and I wouldn't accept working with > inferior instructions. It's common sense. But then, Hermione's idea of > genius often seems foreign to me. > Carol responds: > Yes, but what Hermione does is a side issue. It has nothing to do with > the rightness or wrongness of Harry's behavior, and she's absolutely > right that Harry is getting credit for someone else's work, for > Potions brilliance he doesn't have, and that it's unfair to the > students who *do* know what they're doing and work hard to achieve > their results. Magpie: I agree-it's totally a side issue. I was just saying that, on the side, I can't personally identify with Hermione's wanting to use official instructions rather than the Prince's. I would be all over notes in the book. I don't share Hermione's fondness of authority for authority's sake--on that issue I almost always zig instead of zag. But I would also, as I said, think that the whole class should have access to them. Class doesn't have to be a competition. I wouldn't say it's always wrong for a teacher to use competition in a class. I'm sure it's just one of many things that can be used in different learning situations. Some students might respond to it well. But I don't think there's anything very good in it in this context. (And in general I really think Slughorn's attitude is dreadful for a teacher--it's partly why I'm surprised when people call him "the Good Slytherin"). It's too bad the Prince's book is shared between Hermione, who would keep the information from everyone because it's not officially approved to her standards (heh--why does that make me think of Umbridge?), Harry, who seizes on it only as a personal gift for himself that he uses to his advantage, especially compared to the other students, and Ron, who can't be bothered to care. It's a bit ironic that Snape himself, as I read it, puts the students on a level playing field at his own level. However he dislikes the Gryffindors, he isn't giving them the official book while the Slytherins get his improvements. He more goes the Hufflepuff way in that regard. It's Harry who takes what most would consider the Slytherin attitude. Geoff: Harry has used the book to produce good results. As has been observed, he has had the ability to translate the information in the book into the correct end-product and that has involved his own skill. You can give me a detailed recipe book and I will still make a pig's ear of the resulting meal... as can Neville. Magpie: But clearly in canon, imo, this *isn't* what Harry is being praised for and he knows it. Slughorn says things like, "Wow, adding peppermint! Great idea!" He begins to filter everything Harry does in class through the idea of his being a genius. He's specifically praising the Prince's additions as if Harry thought of them himself. And in class, Harry is thought to be using the exact tools as everyone else--the textbook. When he gets better results Slughorn *thinks* it's becuase he's better at translating the information into a correct end-product while others make pig's ears, but really the other kids are using different instructions. So Harry's got the detailed recipe book and the other kids have bad recipe books, or not detailed recipe books. They're quite possibly being *better* students than Harry in doing as well as they do with the instructions they have. So however fine it is to use better instructions, Harry is not deserving of the reputation he gets as being so much better than the other students. And he hasn't done any of the work you describe going into your notes in chemistry. Harry does happily take credit for "improving" the recipes himself instead of just following them. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 17:17:32 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:17:32 -0000 Subject: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165317 Snape's Witch replies: > > Out of curiosity I rechecked the first year booklist (SS, pg. 66, trade ppbk), and believe that 'One Thousand Magical Herbs and Fungi' by Phyllida Spore is actually the Herbology textbook. Why this book comes to Harry's mind beats me, but might merely show an 11 yr. old boy's disinterest in gardening!! > > 'Magical Drafts and Potions' by Arsenius Jigger is the textbook for Potions and sounds to me like a basic recipe book. I agree that Snape never actually uses it, and doesn't appear to assign another book for later classes. > Carol responds: I agree. Harry's thought about finding Bezoars, which come from the stomach of a goat, in a book on magical herbs and fungi emphasizes his utter ignorance of the WW at that point (in contrast to Muggleborn Hermione, who has read and memorized all her textbooks). He doesn't even know the Herbology text from the Potions text at this point. Now granted, Potions and Herbology are related subjects and HRH sometimes use the Herbology book in researching potions ingredients (since Jigger's book simply gives them the Ministry-approved Potions recipes and, as you say, Snape doesn't even use it except perhaps to determine which potions to teach which class, and even there, he's ahead of the Ministry guidelines, teaching more advanced potions to fifth years than Umbridge considers appropriate). But the point is that Harry doesn't know a Bezoar from a Boobotuber, or Herbology from Potions, when he enters Hogwarts. And you're right. Snape doesn't assign another book for later classes. We see Harry buying a new Charms book every year and a new Transfiguration book as he moves from beginning to intermediate to advanced classes in that subject and a new DADA book with each change of instructor, but never a new Potions book until he ends up, contrary to his expectations, in Slughorn's NEWT Potions class. And why would he need one when Snape puts his own improved directions on the board? Carol, who wishes that JKR had made it clearer that "Magical Herbs and Fungi" was the Herbology text, not the Potions text, and that Snape never teaches from the textbook From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 17:27:47 2007 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:27:47 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: <00de01c7524d$70dc8c90$0678400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165318 > Magpie: > Maybe I'm not getting what you're saying here--Harry had the opportunity to > confess everything and he didn't. He hid the book, switched the covers, > tried to protect his thoughts from Snape's Legilimancy. Protecting a secret > was his priority in the scene. Harry's never been about confessing > everything because it's the right thing to Snape. Finwitch: Had it been Dumbledore, I think Harry would have. Harry does not trust Snape. At all. Oh, and mind you, 16-year-olds do not, in general, feel like telling any adults anything at all... Privacy is a big thing for a teen. And, with Harry's background (surrounded by adults like Dursleys who are not to be trusted) I'm surprised he managed to trust anyone at all. Including Ron, Hermione, Sirius, Dumbledore, Hagrid or himself for that matter. It takes trust before you tell a personal matter (like the Prince was to Harry) to someone. Finwitch From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 17:34:19 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:34:19 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165319 > Vexingconfection: > I would love to see Snape innocent-I just don't think it's gonna happen-but > I do think that Snape could have pointed his wand elsewhere. Why would Harry > have been released from Dumbledores spell at that exact moment though? zgirnius: Ah, but who says he was? > HBP: > A jet of green light shot from the end of Snape's wand and hit > Dumbledore squarely in the chest. Harry's scream of horror never > left him; silent and unmoving, he was forced to watch as Dumbledore > was blasted into the air. zgirnius: If that spell was an AK, Dumbledore was dead the instant that green jet hit him. SO why was Harry "forced" to watch the final, dramatic movements of Dumbledore's dead body? Surely he could have reflexively closed his eyes, at least. Harry does not actually nove until the Death Eaters leave the Tower a few seconds later. He attributes the delay to shock. Fair enough - but if he was that shocked, can we really trust that he is able to distinguish still being frozen by the spell, and being frozen with shock? The way the scene is written leaves the door open for an interpretation that Dumbledore did not die instantly (and thus, whatever it was Snape did was not a true and successful Killing Curse.) From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Thu Feb 22 18:03:29 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 18:03:29 -0000 Subject: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: <005901c75628$3f4add60$7872400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165320 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > bboyminn: > > > This is why Herione infuriates me so. She knew there were > > better formulas, yet doggedly sticks with formulas she > > knows are bad. That's not the 'run to the Library' > > Hermione that I know and love. If she hadn't been so > > stubbornly /against/ that book. She would have gone to > > the Library and found a real authorized official book to > > help her rather than relying on some dodgy notes written > > in the margins of some old book. > > Magpie: > It's crazy. I'm not even Hermione and I wouldn't accept working with > inferior instructions. It's common sense. But then, Hermione's idea of > genius often seems foreign to me. The whole HPB business demonstrates just what kind of student Hermione is, an expert researcher and exact follower of instructions completely lacking in originality. Her essays are undoubtedly detailed, perfect and dull as one of Professor Binn's lectures. I seriously doubt whether she has ever made the step from rote memorization to conceptualizing knowledge. From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 18:09:28 2007 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 18:09:28 -0000 Subject: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: <001801c75682$500dfe20$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165321 >> --Ronin's Comments-- > > Her relentless nagging doesn't let up all year about the book and the way > she dismisses Harry's theories about Malfoy after she has followed him > herself in Diagon alley and watched him, up to no good. Finwitch: I think that one reason Harry decided to keep the book was *because* of Hermione's attitude on it. Aside from Slughorn's praise. Also, let's recall the bigger picture. Dumbledore needed Harry's help to convince Slughorn to accept the position -- and for another matter later. As for Slughorn's praise of Harry's genius... Slughorn *knew* that Harry, unlike most others, got an 'E', not 'O' in his Potions OWL. He must have, that's why Harry needed the book, right? So, Harry's success in Potions -- either Slughorn concluded it was the book or he did not. I think he did, though, just chose not to make an issue of it, mainly because he was just as keen as Lockhart or the Minister to butter Harry into considering him favorably. However, being Slytherin -- Slughorn may even view Harry's use of the notes as a work of a genius in itself -- so long as Harry doesn't admit it, anyway... As for sharing the notes, Harry offered them to Ron, but Ron was, for some reason, *unable* to read them. It's entirely possible that other students wouldn't have been able to read them, either. Makes me wonder-- was Neville perhaps unable to read the instructions Snape put on board? Or had the notes of the Half-Blood Prince been protected by a spell that only permits a Half-Blood to read them? Finwitch From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Feb 22 19:15:45 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 19:15:45 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again /Re: Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165323 > > Magpie: > > Maybe I'm not getting what you're saying here--Harry had the > opportunity to > > confess everything and he didn't. He hid the book, switched the > covers, > > tried to protect his thoughts from Snape's Legilimancy. Protecting > a secret > > was his priority in the scene. Harry's never been about confessing > > everything because it's the right thing to Snape. > > Finwitch: > > Had it been Dumbledore, I think Harry would have. Harry does not > trust Snape. At all. > > Oh, and mind you, 16-year-olds do not, in general, feel like telling > any adults anything at all... Privacy is a big thing for a teen. And, > with Harry's background (surrounded by adults like Dursleys who are > not to be trusted) I'm surprised he managed to trust anyone at all. > > Including Ron, Hermione, Sirius, Dumbledore, Hagrid or himself for > that matter. It takes trust before you tell a personal matter (like > the Prince was to Harry) to someone. Magpie: My instinct is to think he woudln't have told if it were Dumbledore asking either--but we'll never know what would have happened in that case. I don't think it's unusual that Harry isn't coming clean, I was just responding to the idea that this scene somehow shows that Harry is the type who comes clean about things when, I agree, he's not particularly that type at all and that's not unusual. In this scene, he's not coming clean about anything. I don't think it's so much about *trusting* Snape in this case (though he doesn't) but knowing him. McGonagall probably would have taken the book away from him too, and while Harry trusts her in general I think he would have lied to hold on to the book. Finwitch: Slughorn *knew* that Harry, unlike most others, got an 'E', not 'O' in his Potions OWL. He must have, that's why Harry needed the book, right? So, Harry's success in Potions -- either Slughorn concluded it was the book or he did not. I think he did, though, just chose not to make an issue of it, mainly because he was just as keen as Lockhart or the Minister to butter Harry into considering him favorably. However, being Slytherin -- Slughorn may even view Harry's use of the notes as a work of a genius in itself -- so long as Harry doesn't admit it, anyway... Magpie: I don't think Slughorn would necessarily have known about Harry's E, but it would be logical if he understood that from Harry's needing his book, you're right. But I see no evidence that Slughorn has figured out that Harry's book is the reason for his success, especially given his gushing about Harry's having Potions in the blood, etc. He's never had Harry in class before, Ron has a borrowed book too. I think he sees Harry as all the things he sees in his rosy-memories of Lily and never even lets himself consider otherwise. I'd also add that Slughorn seems to encourage himself to always have the best conclusions about people he deems worthy (as opposed to the ones who might as well be invisible so he can't even remember their names). I don't think Harry's real level of Potions skill would have made Slughorn like him so much less. Given what I see of Slughorn in the books I think if he knew Harry was getting his results due to his special book he'd have let him know it in no uncertain terms, winking and making gestures to the book or talking about it when they were alone. I think Harry would pick up on it too and no longer worry about Slughorn finding out. It seems to me canon goes completely against the idea that Slughorn knows that Harry's got a special book helping him. In fact, it seems to undermine a lot of things in Harry's behavior concerning both Slughorn and the book. Finwitch: As for sharing the notes, Harry offered them to Ron, but Ron was, for some reason, *unable* to read them. It's entirely possible that other students wouldn't have been able to read them, either. Makes me wonder--was Neville perhaps unable to read the instructions Snape put on board? Magpie: It's certainly possible other students would have had trouble with the handwriting, though I don't think that's any reason to say Harry could have shared the book with the whole class or explained how helpful it was (they could surely have worked out a way for Slughorn to give those instructions to everyone). I don't see any evidence that Neville has trouble reading Snape's instructions. I think that would have come out by now. Neville's problems seem to be consistently linked to his lack of confidence rather than a sort of also familiar dyslexia situation where it comes down to his not being able to see the board. -m From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 21:21:22 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 21:21:22 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165324 --- "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- "Steve" wrote: > > > > This very much reminds me of my many > > Big Letter/little letter arguments in the past. > > > > > Well, in this case, and I'm sure much to your > > surprise, I agreee thereis 'cheating' then again > > their is /Cheating/, the two not necessarily being > > the same. > > Geoff: > Having followed this thread at a discreet distance > for some time, I thought I would just drop in a couple > of thoughts from the real world. > > ... > > Harry has used the book to produce good results. As > has been observed, he has had the ability to translate > the information in the book into the correct > end-product and that has involved his own skill. You > can give me a detailed recipe book and I will still > make a pig's ear of the resulting meal... as can Neville. > > ... bboyminn: I don't know why I didn't think of this before, but Geoff has just given me the perfect analogy to describe that is happening - Home Economics or Bachelor Living (for guys). (What do you call it in Britain?) You are in your cooking class and the teacher says tomorrow we are all going to bake a chocolate cake. You bring in you mother's best favorite chocolate cake recipe, and everyone else uses the recipe in the textbook. Is that cheating? I don't think so, and cooking recipes are the perfect analogy because, as Geoff points out, he could have a well-know well-respected tried-and-true recipe for 'chocolate cake' and he would probably still muck it up. The recipe itself is not as critical as having an intuitive sense of how the ingredients go together. Even a simply recipe can be ruined of you stir too much or too little. So, the instinct and understanding are about having the sense to know when you have stirred just enough. Having the right recipe is no guarantee of success. Having a good instinct for applying the recipe, is a much greater predictor of success. So, that is what Potions Class is, it is for developing a good instinct for how to apply recipes. First and foremost, you must learn to read and follow instructions, that is a must for a beginner, but quickly, if you have a talent, you go beyond that. You learn you can wing it, but wing it based in knowledge and experience, and still get good and sometime superior results. I think perhaps Snape's improved recipes are just an natural instinct and understanding of how the recipe is coming together. One counterclockwise stir for every seven clockwise stirs simply made sense to Snape based on what he saw happening in his cauldron. Squashing your beans with the flat of your knife simply made sense, and once tried, clearly produced superior results. Snape is cooking with an eye toward the goal, not toward the recipe. Now in this case, we know that the textbook recipes, even when done right, don't produce much beyond mediocre chocolate cake. Harry on the other hand simply found a better, and I might add, a more detailed and complex, chocolate cake recipe. Yes, he produced better results, but he did it by using a more complicated and detailed method. If Harry didn't have a basic aptitude for potions, the complexity of the recipe would have guaranteed disaster. Again, the basic goal is chocolate cake. Those with good instincts will produce better chocolate cake. Those with a better recipe, will produce even better chocolate cake but only if they have a natural gift for understanding and following the recipe. In terms of level of cheating, I think this is far closer to baking chocolate cake in cooking class, than it is to performance in any academic class. There is a goal - chocolate cake, and that is the objective you are being rated on. The degree to which you achieve that objective is based on your ability to combine recipe with instinct. So, I'm sure the other kids in cooking class would have thought you were 'cheating' (in parenthesis and with small letters) but I don't think anyone would have considered it Cheating (with capital letters). Harry achieves his goal by a more complex and detailed method, but I must add that the other students did NOT achieve their goal even when there lesser instructions are considered. These were recipes for 'chocolate cake' and it seems that each student did NOT achieve that goal within the limits of the recipe. It was a mediorce chocolate cake recipe, and the student seem to have achieve a noticable /less/ than mediocre chocolate cake. Yes, Harry achieve his results by using his 'mothers' cake recipe, but it is not about the specific recipe, it is more about your ability to /apply/ ANY recipe. These are difficult potions; this is NEWT level. My sense upon remembering what I read are that the other students are stuggling regardless of what recipe they have. The good students come close, but no student is dead on, even within the limits of their recipes. Does that make sense? Steve/bboyminn From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Feb 22 22:19:52 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 22:19:52 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ A bit of evil Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165326 > Alla: > > He says that one basically needs the intent to complete spell, does > he not? Isn't it more like foreshadowing of Harry's incomplete > crucio? Pippin: But nothing comes of Harry's failed crucio, so that itself seems to be just a foreshadowing of something else. > Alla: > > No, sorry again, but I strongly disagree. I do **not** need any > guesswork to explain these things in light of innocent Lupin, > because none of those things makes me take a leap and say that it > implies Evil Lupin. > > Sure, he was suspected as a spy, just as Sirius was. Does it show me > in any way, shape or form that Lupin is a Voldemort's servant? > > No, no more than Sirius would be. It just shows me that there was a > mistrust between Marauders, which I highly suspect was mostly > Peter's doing, but I can be wrong of course. ." > So, what I am trying to say? I believe to interpet canon the way > you do and come up with ESE!Lupin requires series of complex > interpretations. Pippin: How can "Lupin was suspected because he was the spy" be a more complex interpretation than "Lupin was suspected because Pettigrew sowed mistrust among the Marauders." There is no canon of Pettigrew doing that successfully, in fact his attempts to divide Lupin and Sirius in the shack are pitiful. Alla: > By the way, to me not straightforward does not mean not supported by canon, it just means that you pick one of the several > interpretations and the most complex one. > > I think I will stick with what I think as straightforward Lupin for > now :) Pippin: Straightforward is one thing and superficial is another :) If a "straightforward" theory can only be maintained by arbitrarily disregarding canon then I'd say its claim to be straightforward is questionable. There's no question that JKR hides subtle clues in the text which, if discovered, make the 'straightfoward' reading untenable. For example, most readers of CoS won't notice the "I AM LORD VOLDEMORT" anagram until it's pointed out in the text. But for those who do notice it, the straightforward interpretation of canon will not be that Riddle means well. Most readers haven't paid attention to the fact that the moon appears in the sky before Lupin escapes from the Shrieking Shack. But once it's been noticed, the straightforward interpretation can't be that Lupin's transformation took place by accident. Similarly, the missing rope shadow from the priori incantatem should prove that Wormtail was not using Voldemort's wand when Cedric was killed and the blood on Dumbledore's face should prove that he didn't die on the tower. These clues are absolutely unambiguous, IMO -- the only way to refute them is to pretend that JKR doesn't care about logic or that they're not what she meant to write. And that is the most complex interpretation of all -- once you've allowed that, you can allow anything. Pippin From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Feb 22 22:24:40 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:24:40 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On lying and cheating Message-ID: <22070826.1172183080396.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165327 Carol: >And Potions is not a cooking class. It's more like chemistry, and >getting a potion wrong can have disastrous results ranging from melted >cauldrons and explosions to poisonous fumes. One scientist using >another's findings is very different from a cook using another's >recipe--but even chef's protect their cooking secrets. And no Home Ec >teacher would let a kid bring a recipe from home if the assignment was >to bake the chocolate cake using the recipe on page 272. That would >only be permissible if the assignment was to use any available recipe. Bart (in agreement): There is something that is strongly implied but not explicitly stated in HBP about NEWT potions: the students are NOT necessarily following recipes. They are learning theory (theoretically), which allows them to develop their own recipes, or to finish partial recipes. Most of the students are doing the work for themselves. Harry has the answers written out for him. In other words, while the other students are learning potions theory, Harry is still following a cookbook. In high school, chemistry was usually, "Here's a theory, here's an experiment to test the theory, perform the experiment and create a lab report." In an advanced chemistry course, it was more, "Here's a theory, design your own experiment to test the theory, and create a lab report." If someone's textbook had descriptions of valid experiments in the margins, then whoever was using that book would have been cheating if he claimed that he came up with the experiments by himself. Bart From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 22:59:21 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 22:59:21 -0000 Subject: A bit of evil Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165328 > Pippin: > How can "Lupin was suspected because he was the spy" > be a more complex interpretation than "Lupin was suspected > because Pettigrew sowed mistrust among the Marauders." > There is no canon of Pettigrew doing that successfully, in > fact his attempts to divide Lupin and Sirius in the shack > are pitiful. Alla: Lupin was suspected because he was a spy is not in my view a straightforward interpretation, because by that token Sirius should have been a spy as well. I do not remember any support for the idea that there was more reason to suspect Lupin than Sirius. And Peter did not sow distrust against Marauders? Peter, who fooled everybody? Peter, who framed Sirius so brilliantly? I disagree. Of course he cannot divide Lupin and Sirius in Shack - because they know who he is now, he is uncovered, so why the traitor responsible for the death of their friends should be able to divide them? My point is that he was able to do so while disguised. > Pippin: > Straightforward is one thing and superficial is another :) If a > "straightforward" theory can only be maintained by arbitrarily > disregarding canon then I'd say its claim to be straightforward > is questionable. Alla: No, I am not disregarding any canon, I am just interpreting it differently than you do. I believe that your interpretation is much more complex than mine, that is all, that is does not preclude you from being right obviously, but neither is I am going to think of ESE!Lupin other than complex interpretation. Pippin: > Similarly, the missing rope shadow from the priori incantatem > should prove that Wormtail was not using Voldemort's > wand when Cedric was killed and the blood on Dumbledore's face should > prove that he didn't die on the tower. These clues are absolutely > unambiguous, IMO -- the only way to refute them is to pretend that JKR > doesn't care about logic or that they're not what she meant to write. Alla: Didn't JKR say that Wormtail was in fact using Voldemort's wand? ( Don't remember for sure) And of course the problem is that we do not know that she meant to write what you are interpreting those clues to be. And we had been through blood on DD's face, so I will just say that it is so not unambiguous for me :) JMO, Alla, who is boldly betting that Lupin is not evil, had not been evil, will not be evil, but who of course has her crow cooked and in the freeser. From mros at xs4all.nl Thu Feb 22 23:05:55 2007 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 00:05:55 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective References: Message-ID: <001401c756d6$0195e7e0$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 165329 Steve: >>>Some say that Harry is cheating in Potions by using the annotated HBP book. The implication is that he is cheating because he is taking credit for work that isn't his. But isn't that exactly what all the students are doing? Aren't they all working from Snape's instructions written on the board, or following a formula and procedure written in their own textbooks? How is what Harry doing any different than what all the students are doing, other that he is simply taking his formula and instructions from a different source.<<< Marion Okay. Let's say that I want to write a book. I've never shown any literary promise before, and my essays suck, but I want to do so anyway and I go to whatever town it happens to be where JKR happens to reside in and I shop around for a blank notebook to write my non-existing novel in. I can't find a notebook quite to my liking and decide to go to a coffeeshop. Lo and behold, what do I find on the ground, slipped between my chair and the wall? A notebook! Well, it's been scribbled full already and it has 'property of JKR, DH manuscript' on it, but hey, finders keepers, losers weepers. So I take the manuscript home, I find that the scribbling inside is a rather complete story about this Harry Potter kid in a wizarding school (hey, I've heard about this Harry Potter phenomena, but I've never read a single book) So I type it out, and publish it on the web as my own original work. I don't even put in a disclaimer that the characters are the intellectual property of JKR. Hey, my notebook, my story, my characters. I can tell you already that if I claim, on the internet or in any other kind of writing, that these characters are my intellectual property, I would be sued unto an inch of my life. You can just imagine the scene in the courtroom, can't you? Lawyer: So you wrote this all yourself, did you? It's not in your own handwriting. Me: No, I adopt a different handwriting when I'm in a creative mood. Lawyer (with predatory glint in his eye): It says on the cover 'manuscript by JKR' though. Me (looking like deer in headlights): Uhhh, yes, that's my nickname! Hah! Cashing in on other people's work is a pipe-dream, especially with a *rich* creative mind as JKR. Her lawyers would chew you up and spit you out. There is such a thing as intellectual property, as plagiarism, as taking other people's work *without their consent* and claiming it as your own. But what about fanfiction? Don't thousands upon thousands of fans write stories about Harry and Hogwarts? What's the difference? We all quote the books on this list, aren't we stealing copyright, committing plagiarism? No. We don't claim the characters or the stories as our own creation. We don't copy pieces and lines from canon and say to eachother, "look how brilliant *I* am for writing this clever line" when it's in fact JKR's line. This would not only be illegal, it would also rather pathetic. JKR wrote the stories, she published them (she got filthy rich by selling them!) and we are allowed to read them, to argue and bicker about them, we may even fantasize about them and write our own stories using her characters, as long as we acknowleged her intellectual possession of them in a disclaimer. Snape made highly intelligent and original improvements on potions and created new spells. If he, as a teacher, taught these improvements to his students then his students (if they were clever enough) benefited from this. But that still doesn't mean his students are allowed to claim that *they* invented these improved potions. To use your latest 'grandmother's cake recipe' allagory, if your home-economics class issued a competition in which the one who invented the most tasty new kind of cake, and you did not just take your own grandmother's recipe, but the recipe you found lying around at your elderly neighbours' house when you went there for a polite cup of coffee (the recipe does not belong to you, but you sneaked it into your pocket) and you claimed to your home-economics teacher that you slaved and slaved at your stove at home, trying out new ingredients (also claiming to be such a instinctive and intuitive cook that you constantly potter around in the kitchen improving on recipes whilst in truth you wouldn't be found dead with an apron on let alone that you were willing to *cook*!) If you did all this, if you sneaked away a recipe from somebody else without their permission, if you used it in a competition and claimed it as your own creative invention, and if this won you a prize, a prize that other, more creative cooks ought to have won, then you are a thief, a liar and a cheat. If your neighbour went to the police, the police would probably laugh at her. There is no law against stealing recipes from the bookshelves of old ladies, after all. But this would hardly be the point. You'd still be a thief. If you used that recipe, claiming it was your own invention, in a contest, you are a liar and a cheat. Lastly, I used to dabble in fanart. I've shown some of my work during conventions in Blackpool and there were several pieces on fanwebsites. It's easy to right-click-and-save a picture on internet. If somebody had 'hijacked' my art and put in on their own website, claiming they made the art themselves, if they then also entered *my art* in a fan-contest, without my knowledge and my consent, claiming again to have made the art themselves, they would be a liar, a cheat and a thief. It's as simple as that. Marion (who will padlock her portfolio if she ever visited a HP convention, shocked as she is at the apparent ease some people seem to forget the notion 'creative and intellectial ownership') [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 22 23:32:42 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 23:32:42 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165330 bboyminn wrote: > > I don't know why I didn't think of this before, but Geoff has just given me the perfect analogy to describe that is happening - Home Economics or Bachelor Living (for guys). (What do you call it in Britain?) > > You are in your cooking class and the teacher says tomorrow we are all going to bake a chocolate cake. You bring in you mother's best favorite chocolate cake recipe, and everyone else uses the recipe in the textbook. Is that cheating? > > I don't think so, and cooking recipes are the perfect analogy because, as Geoff points out, he could have a well-know well-respected tried-and-true recipe for 'chocolate cake' and he would probably still muck it up. > > The recipe itself is not as critical as having an intuitive sense of how the ingredients go together. Even a simply recipe can be ruined of you stir too much or too little. So, the instinct and understanding are about having the sense to know when you have stirred just enough. Having the right recipe is no guarantee of success. Having a good instinct for applying the recipe, is a much greater predictor of success. So, that is what Potions Class is, it is for developing a good instinct for how to apply recipes. Carol responds: But Harry doesn't *have* that "intuitive sense" or he'd have figured out the improvements on his own. Snape (the HBP) *does* have it. Harry is just following Teen!Snape's directions, not discovering anything for himself. You're still missing the main point, which is that *Harry is receiving credit for the HBP's research and creativity.* That he himself doesn't have that creativity is clear from the fact that he returns to his old, inferior results after he hides the book and from his determination to keep Snape from revealing to Slughorn the source of his supposed brilliance. I think you're determined to credit Harry with a natural aptitude he doesn't have, exactly as Slughorn did. Somehow, I don't think we're going to see Potions-genius!Harry brewing Wolfbane Potion for Lupin or concocting Veritaserum to use on Snape in DH, much less improving on either of the formlas. And Potions is not a cooking class. It's more like chemistry, and getting a potion wrong can have disastrous results ranging from melted cauldrons and explosions to poisonous fumes. One scientist using another's findings is very different from a cook using another's recipe--but even chef's protect their cooking secrets. And no Home Ec teacher would let a kid bring a recipe from home if the assignment was to bake the chocolate cake using the recipe on page 272. That would only be permissible if the assignment was to use any available recipe. Carol, wondering why she's still arguing when it's obviously wasted effort From muellem at bc.edu Thu Feb 22 23:50:22 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 23:50:22 -0000 Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165332 I was looking thru the HPL site and decided to look at this family tree that JKL drew. One thing that struck me was the year that Regulus died. Not that he died in 1979, but his father Orion ALSO died in 1979. Hmmmm....got me thinking DD offered to "hide" Draco & his mother from Voldemort (Lighting Struck Tower, HBP). DD's line about "He cannot kill you if you are already dead. Come over to the right side, Draco, and we can hide you more completely than you can possibly imagine. What is more, I can send members of the Order to your mother tonight to hide her likewise." Am Ed Hardcover pp 391-392. Sirius never talked a lot about his father. We know that Orion, from Sirius in OotP, was not a DeathEater. Could it be that DD hid not only Regulus, but Orion as well? The same offer he gave to Draco? Could it be that there maybe not just one, but two remaining Blacks? And will Harry meet up with them in DH? There is also Regulus's uncle Cygnus(the father of Bella & Cissy) who died in 1979. Oh my, what a web this tree is!! Did anyone else catch this on the family tree? The family tree link: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/blackfamilytree.html I also noticed that there is a Potter on the tree. A Charlus Potter who married Dorea. Could these be Harry's grandparents? James Potter was a pureblood and since neither Dorea or Charlus's names are blasted away from the tree, I can safely assume that Charlus was a pure-blood as well. Only Dorea has a birthdate & deathyear, so if we go by that (1920), she was an older mother for James. JRK stated that James' parents were older and died a natural death. Could it be??? colebiancardi(who does believe that Regulus is still standing after all these years) From rlace2003 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 00:51:02 2007 From: rlace2003 at yahoo.com (rlace2003) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 00:51:02 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165333 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > the blood on Dumbledore's face should > prove that he didn't die on the tower. These clues are absolutely > unambiguous, IMO -- the only way to refute them is to pretend that JKR > doesn't care about logic or that they're not what she meant to write. > > And that is the most complex interpretation of all -- once you've > allowed that, you can allow anything. Maybe I'm missing something, but how does the blood on Dumbledore's face prove that he didn't die on the tower? Ryan From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Feb 23 01:49:45 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 01:49:45 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165334 Ryan: > Maybe I'm missing something, but how does the blood on Dumbledore's > face prove that he didn't die on the tower? Ceridwen: The reasoning is, if Dumbledore had died on the tower, his heart would have stopped pumping blood at that moment. The AK was directed at his chest. The AK, according to canon, kills instantly. Therefore, when he was found at the base of the tower, there should not have been a trail of blood from his mouth as the blood would all have settled low in the body due to gravity. Dumbledore did not, as Harry saw, fall headfirst, and he didn't apparently land on his head. He was on his back. So, the blood would not have been able to go upward without a beating heart to pump it to the mouth. I'm not a forensics expert so I can't say for sure. But it does sound like a sticking point, *if* JKR knows this much about forensics and is not going for the visual effect here. Ceridwen. From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 02:03:19 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 02:03:19 -0000 Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165335 > Colebiancardi wrote: > Could it be that DD hid not only Regulus, but Orion as well? The same offer he gave to Draco? > Could it be that there maybe not just one, but two remaining Blacks? > And will Harry meet up with them in DH? Goddlefrood: It would certainly be good to think that some of the Black family survived. Unfortunately I cannot see it happening mainly because Sirius was stated to be the last of the Blacks and the house at Grimmaud Place was his. If there were other male survivors, particularly his father, then surely the ownership would not have passed down. Sirius, from memory, also stated in Order that his parents and Regulus were dead. If they somehow survived is it really likely that Sirius, who was many things but rarely withheld the truth from Harry, would not have hinted at it at the very least? > Colebiancardi again: > There is also Regulus's uncle Cygnus(the father of Bella & Cissy) who died in 1979. Oh my, what a web this tree is!! Goddlefrood: I may be wrong, and often am, but I recall JKR mentioning somewhere that there was a bug or sickness that devastated the wizarding population in the late seventies. If I come across the quote I will supply. Sirius, while vague on Reggie, was never prompted to speak of either his father or Uncle. Either, then, the Black family elders fell victim to this sickness or they perhaps were killed at the same time as Reggie maybe while trying to defend him. > Colebiancardi: > I also noticed that there is a Potter on the tree. A Charlus Potter > who married Dorea. Could these be Harry's grandparents? Goddlefrood: Again, didn't JKR say that these Potters were James's parents and again I will supply the reference if I find it. As I say I may be wrong, and it would be interesting to get as much detail as possible in Deathly Hallows. Goddlefrood who is now resolved to break his habit of lurking on the list without comment. From celizwh at intergate.com Fri Feb 23 02:43:39 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 02:43:39 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165336 Ryan: > > Maybe I'm missing something, but how does > > the blood on Dumbledore's face prove that > > he didn't die on the tower? Ceridwen: > The reasoning is, if Dumbledore had died on > the tower, his heart would have stopped pumping > blood at that moment. The AK was directed at > his chest. The AK, according to canon, kills instantly. > Therefore, when he was found at the base of the tower, > there should not have been a trail of blood from his > mouth as the blood would all have settled low in the > body due to gravity. Dumbledore did not, as Harry saw, > fall headfirst, and he didn't apparently land on his > head. He was on his back. So, the blood would not > have been able to go upward without a beating heart > to pump it to the mouth. > *if* JKR knows this much about forensics and is > not going for the visual effect here. houyhnhnm: If the factoid "dead bodies can't bleed" is a staple of detective fiction, I would expect Rowling to be familiar with that. I'm inclined to see the blood on DD's face as one more clue that events on the tower were not as they appeared. From a pathology standpoint, however, as someone who spent years working in clinical laboratories doing coaguation testing, I couldn't think of any reason why a corpse could not bleed postmortem. When this argument came up before, I went looking for online authority to back me up; the only site I found was a little on the gruesome side and I didn't want to offend anyone's sensibilities, but yesterday I found a couple more: http://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=237983 http://netk.net.au/CrimJustice/Medical.asp >From the latter: "It is important to appreciate that bleeding does not require a person to be alive, nor does it require the heart to be beating. It simply requires there to be fluid blood in the vessels. If those vessels are torn or damaged, then the fluid blood within them will escape, and this is what is called bleeding." From kking0731 at gmail.com Fri Feb 23 02:43:59 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 02:43:59 -0000 Subject: Bloodlines and talent (Was: To the Extreme) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165337 Attributed to Carol (but it was me (Snow), as Carol rightfully points out): And, Hermione (a muggleborn) does outdo Draco in grades to the point that Lucius scolds Draco for his lack of performance. Carol snipped: Oops. I didn't say this. It might be your response to me.(?) Yes, Lucius scolds Draco, but only in relation to being outperformed by a Muggleborn, not in relation to anyone else (Harry, for example) >snipped< Snow again: This was the point I was trying to address...Lucius was upset that a muggleborn whoops his son in grades with little concern that this muggleborn who was also a girl who was also a Gryffindor was the victor. What seems to be utterly more important to Lucius is that she is muggleborn more so than the fact she is a girl or which house she belonged to. Lucius' rant could certainly be put off as simply a prejudice to muggleborns but where did Lucius, or anyone like him, form this prejudice? Where did it come from if it is just prejudice, was it simply an inherited disposition from Slytherin? Is there some type of foundation for the reason behind this prejudice? What plants the seed of prejudice; indifference towards those who are unlike you or is it simply fear; Or...in my suspicion, both. These non-purebloods or mudbloods exhibit power, some exhibiting much greater power than some purebloods. Could these persons have been viewed as a threat? Why did Slytherin object so fiercely over teaching anyone other than purebloods? Everyone seemed to be getting along well enough to raise the school in the beginning to each Founder's individual values, so what changed? Why did the other three founders at the time not have the same objection as Slytherin? Were any of the remaining three Founders not pureblood? If they were not pureblood, why didn't Slytherin object to them from the beginning if he had such a prejudice, if they were also pureblood, why didn't they savor Slytherin's objection? We were told that Slytherin would only teach those whose ancestry was purest when the school began, which tells me that there were children whose ancestry was less than pure and yet he didn't have difficulty with that issue at the time. What changed? It seems to me, and I could be quite wrong, that Slytherin was concerned with muggleborns and not just anyone who was not pureblood. Slytherin created a Chamber that harbored a basilisk whose main objective was to kill mudbloods (muggleborns) not just anyone who was not of pure blood. We don't know the whole story behind the founders so there could be more to it than the obvious prejudice. Snow previously: On to the subject matter, Neville ... >snipped< Carol responds: But he wasn't suspected of being a Muggleborn. Gran and Uncle Algie know perfectly well who his parents are, and he looks so much like his mother that Harry recognizes Alice Longbottom in a photo before Mad-Eye identifies her. There's no question that Neville is the child of two pureblood wizards, both Aurors (at least according to OoP, if not GoF). Snow again: There is no doubt whatsoever that Neville is the product of purebloods and is a pureblood himself, what is significant to me is his lack of magic for having such a background and even more so his not being Chosen as Voldemort's target if pureblood status was in itself the greater threat. Why did Dumbledore purposely point out the fact that Voldemort did not choose the pureblood but a half-blood like himself? Is Dumbledore implying that Voldemort should naturally have viewed the pureblood as more of a threat or is it more telling that Voldemort saw the half- blood (like himself) as more of a threat? Snow previously: Ron being exactly on par with Harry seems to be a bit over the edge to me...just look at the first flying lesson. Carol snipped: I was talking about classes and OWLs, not Quidditch, at which Ron is quite good ... >snipped< Snow again: I understand where you are coming from but what I was basically talking about was Ron's overall performance as a competent pureblood wizard compared to Harry's performance (whose maternal grandparent's were muggle) or the muggleborn Hermione's. Ron, the pureblood, doesn't size up well, magically speaking, just against these two non-purebloods. This is not to say Ron is worthless or not talented, it is just that he exhibits less magical tendency than the other two who are not of pure blood. Snow previously: When the Felix Felicis was the award, as far as I recall, Hermione would have been the next in line to achieve the award and not Draco...muggleborn wins again. Carol: Do we know that? I'm not sure that we know what Draco was doing >snipped< Snow again: There are a few paragraphs actually but I'm only going to quote the most prominent portions: "...Malfoy had expected to be treated like Harry...perhaps even hoped for some preferential treatment of the type he had learned to expect from Snape." "It looked as though Malfoy would have to rely on nothing but talent to win the bottle of Felix Felicis." "Slughorn moved slowly among the tables, peering into cauldrons. He made no comment ... At last he reached the table where Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Ernie were sitting." "Hermione's potion he gave an approving nod. Then he saw Harry's..." HBP pgs. 190 and 191 U.S. edition >From these few quotes, it appears to me, that Slughorn passed all other cauldrons without comment, since none seemed to be suitable by his lack of response, until he reached Hermione's which he gave an approving nod and of course Harry's. This is why I deduced that Hermione's potion would have been the winner if it hadn't been for Harry's perfect potion. Carol snipped: Just because Draco is not quite as good as Hermione doesn't mean that he's not very good. As I said, he must have earned an O on his Potions OWL (like Ernie Macmillan, three other Slytherins, and three Ravenclaws) even to be in that class. Harry and Ron are the only two E students there. I'm not denying that Hermione is a very good student, even without Snape's improved Potions directions, but it's not because she's a Muggleborn. Snow: My point wasn't that pureblood Draco isn't any good (although I do question his grades), it's the fact that muggleborn Hermione's is better. It is true that Hermione is anal over her studies but a person with no talent could study till the cows come home and it won't make much of a difference, in the end talent is a key ingredient. Draco has been use to preferential treatment (as was quoted above) at least from Snape and doesn't seem to be concerned with studies. I know from personal experience that kids in school, whose parent is on the school board, definitely get preferential treatment. The same could be true with Lucius position at the Ministry. How can we be positive Lucius didn't have influence over the OWL examiners, could it not be possible? Lucius has displayed his ability to control situations by using threats like he did when the governors discharged Dumbledore in COS. Snow previously: The only thing I haven't already responded to would be the twins and I remain bound to my theory that not all Weasley's are Weasley's. Dumbledore's parentage is up for grabs but I would lay odds that he is muggleborn. Carol: Erm, uh, I don't know what to say. Not all Wesleys are Weasleys despite the red hair and the physical resemblance between the Twins and Charlie? (In terms of personality, they resemble Ginny.) Despite Mrs. Weasley's Boggart, which includes Harry only because he's an unloved orphan? Where's the canon to support this bit of speculation? Snow: More like suspicious canon that we have been over in the past. There are a few comments that the twins have made which allow me some room for this suspicion: "I'm not Fred, I'm George," said the boy. Honestly, woman, you call yourself our mother? Can't you tell I'm George?" SS pg. 92 U.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 indignantly, as his mother pushed him aside and flung her arms around her youngest son." OOP pg. 163 U. S. Not only did Molly announce that Ron's victory of being made a prefect meant that was everyone in the family to do so but when George questioned her about the statement she pushed him aside to hug her youngest son. I feel that just these two examples allow me enough room to question whether the twins are her natural sons. Carol: (It's not a *theory* unless it can be supported by evidence.) To suggest that they're not purebloods despite canon to the contrary is to weasel out of the argument. (Sorry. I couldn't resist the pun, and I really do think that you're using speculation to support speculation rather than going by the available evidence.) Snow: Love the pun, it was quite apropos considering your viewpoint, although I would have to disagree that I don't have `any' canon to support at least my suspicion, which in my estimation gives permission to theorize to all possible or improbable degrees. My possible submission that Molly is not the twin's biological mother could very well be the logical answer as to why she excluded them when announcing that's everyone in the family. My somewhat improbable submission to what I consider a theory is the link I made to Molly's brothers, who also have the initials, F and G. First off, Fabian and Gideon were murdered during the first Voldemort war, which started before the birth of Harry and Ron and ended when Harry was 15 months old. The twins were two years older than Ron therefore they could have been infants when their father died and were brought up by Mrs. Weasley as her own without them having any memory of the fact. Mr. Weasley tells the kids at the campsite in GOF about finding the Dark Mark over the house. Since Fabian and Gideon are Molly's brothers it would be somewhat safe to assume that Mr. Weasley had found Molly's brothers dead. Now no matter how unlikely this may sound to some, I feel there could be a connection since it fits the timeframe of Molly's brothers' deaths with the age of the twins at the time, which would allow for them to be unaware that Molly is not their biological mother and give some realistic reason as to Molly's statement that excluded the twins from her family. Carol: As for Dumbledore, I think he might have been a Half-Blood given his interest in Muggles, but the odds of two Muggleborn brothers, both wizards, are small. The only example in canon is the Creevey brothers. But I'd lay odds that he's a descendant of Godric Gryffindor, given his ownership of the Sword of Gryffindor and a Phoenix whose colors are those of Gryffindor. There's a Godric's Hollow connection as well, probably. Snow: Could be as you say, unfortunately there is very little canon to support any claim of bloodlines to either Dumbledore or Gryffindor, all we can do is see what might fit accordingly to the rest of the text. What could be feasible or not. It's an act of deduction for me. Could it be plausible that Dumbledore is a pureblood? As you have said, as well as myself, Dumbledore's `interest in muggles' and knowledge of their ways allows for the assumption that Dumbledore could be at least part muggle. What I have done is to take that assumption one step further and see how a muggleborn Dumbledore would fit the scenario. For my current claim, it fits quite nicely since he is the most powerful magical character we have seen in the books. Even Voldemort fears Dumbledore. Carol: BTW, Salazar Slytherin, a pureblood who wanted only purebloods like himself in his House, was quite powerful considering that he built the Chamber of Secrets and placed a Basilisk in it. And saying that Sirius Black and James Potter aren't really purebloods because there aren't any real purebloods is to make the whole discussion pointless. True, the Squibs get burned off the tapestry, but none of them is a direct ancestor of Sirius Black. Snow: I agree that SS was very powerful but does this show that he was the most powerful, was he more powerful than any of the other three founders whose bloodlines we are unaware of? Carol: It's also important, it seems to me, that JKR has her Trio consist of a Pureblood, a Half-Blood, and a Muggleborn. (She also gives them each a different wand core, Harry's being canonically a Phoenix feather and Ron's canonically a unicorn hair, with Hermione's revealed to be dragon heartstring in an interview, so that all three of Ollivander's "powerful magical substances" are represented.) Snow: I've always liked this connection! It's like a perfect marriage ... when all three of the trio work together they are at their best, each bringing their own talent to the collective whole making them a strong force. (The seven course task in COS) It seems almost representative of all the houses of Hogwarts uniting as one. Each one of the trio coming from different backgrounds would be equal to the four houses that each have a specific characteristic represented by their house. If the houses were to unite, they would also be a strong force. Carol: I think that JKR's presenting some Muggleborns as talented or powerful serves only to show that the pureblood superiority ethic is false, not to show that Muggleborns are *better* than purebloods. Lily isn't better at magic than James. They're both powerful and talented in their different ways. And Harry, the product of the two, is not weaker than Lily but more powerful than James. His Quidditch talent seems to be inherited directly from his pureblood father. His more unusual gifts, e.g. Parseltongue, are the result of that unfortunate encounter with Lord Voldemort. That he's alive at all is the result of his Muggleborn mother's sacrifice. But he hasn't inherited her talent for Charms or Potions (Slughorn to the contrary regarding Potions) any more than he's an Animagus like his father. Snow: I would go one better where it concerns Harry and say that he was more powerful than either of his parents. Harry's talents excel during times of necessity but have never been fully realized. Now whether this talent is due in part to his unwanted, but inherited all the same, gifts Voldemort bestowed on him or if Harry's parents (being from their respective backgrounds) were why he is a very powerful wizard. Harry doesn't realize just how powerful he is and the majority of canon has been seen through Harry's eyes. When Harry was in the spinning room with all the doors in the Dept. of Mysteries and was following Bella towards the Atrium, Harry spoke to the room telling `no one' to show him the door and in an instant the room stopped spinning and opened the correct door. Harry never thought twice about what he had done or how he had done it, even after the fact. Harry, during Priori Incantatum, caused the bead between the two connected wands to stop and reverse direction towards Voldemort. Again Harry never thinks what type of magic could have caused this specific effect. Harry's abilities seem to be spontaneous to the task at hand but he has yet to recognize that he even has skills let alone nurture these skills for the upcoming battle. Carol snipped: Yes, Voldemort chose the Half-Blood like himself over the Pureblood. But that doesn't mean that Voldemort's reasoning is correct or that Half-Bloods are more powerful than Purebloods, with Muggleborns the most powerful of all. It doesn't work that way. Talent and power vary >snipped examples< Snow: You could very well be correct, Carol. I'm just considering a new viewpoint of the bloodline importance of these books. Lack of information can be equally as telling as canon fact. When I am not given a bloodline background on several powerful characters, like Dumbledore for instance, my first response is to question why? We were informed by JKR on her site that Dumbledore's background would be a profitable line of inquiry and yet we have almost nothing to go on so using the given canon is almost worthless. I feel we need to question areas where we have been denied helpful information. Why Dumbledore's bloodline could matter at all might depend on why blood matters so much in the first place. Snow ? with apologies for being five days late with this post...I've been lucky to read a post and respond with a one-liner let alone respond in depth...anyway thanks for your thoughts! From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Feb 23 02:50:01 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 02:50:01 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165338 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > > Ryan: > > Maybe I'm missing something, but how does the blood on Dumbledore's > > face prove that he didn't die on the tower? > > Ceridwen: > The reasoning is, if Dumbledore had died on the tower, his heart would > have stopped pumping blood at that moment. The AK was directed at his > chest. The AK, according to canon, kills instantly. > > Therefore, when he was found at the base of the tower, there should not > have been a trail of blood from his mouth as the blood would all have > settled low in the body due to gravity. Dumbledore did not, as Harry > saw, fall headfirst, and he didn't apparently land on his head. He was > on his back. So, the blood would not have been able to go upward > without a beating heart to pump it to the mouth. Pippin: More than that, the blood is liquid, "a trickle", so that Harry can wipe it away, thirty minutes later when Harry reaches the body. Blood normally clots within a few minutes, so it should have been dry if Dumbledore died when Harry thought he did. JKR hardly needs to be a forensics expert to know that. Pippin From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 02:52:30 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 02:52:30 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165339 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol responds: > > You're still missing the main point, which is that *Harry is > receiving credit for the HBP's research and creativity.* Mike: I catch your point Carol . But I think many people are still debating whether Harry was cheating or not in using the book. Having read your "main point" phrased several ways lends me to think that you do not ascribe to the cheating part of this debate with regards to use of the book. Is that right? Instead, your main point, which I do agree with, is that Harry's taken credit for the "Prince's" research smacks of plageristic oppurtunism. Fundamentally, I would have liked Harry to have caught Slughorn alone after class and told him that he was following superior instructions from his marked up Potions book. Realistically, I understand Harry's reluctance to do so. And I think this stems from all the non-potion spells that Harry wants to explore. Harry does not want to lose that oppurtunity and, on a fundamental level, I don't believe it is Harry's place to point out to Slughorn that he (Sluggy) assigned an inferior book for his NEWT students. Moralistically, yes Harry should share his superior instructions. IOW, his new reputation for potion brilliance is not as important to Harry as the chance of losing the oppurtunity to discover all these cool new spells, imo. But...but, that does not exonerate Harry from claiming credit by proxy of all the Prince's work. It's this two pronged part of the problem that lies at the base of this debate. Fess up to the Prince and lose the new spells or keep quiet with the side result of him receiving undeserved acclaim for potions brilliance. And with him not minding the accolades, that swings it for Harry. It's a closer call for those of us that don't think using the book is cheating. > Carol, wondering why she's still arguing when it's obviously wasted effort Mike: You know, I'm sure you saw everything I just posted, since most of it draws from your main point. I wonder why you didn't try to emphasize those points more? I think you might have gotten more converts, like me. A little side note: I noticed that most of the guys come down on the not-cheating side, while most of the ladies prefer the is-cheating side. Not inferring anything, just observing the stats. Unless, of course, to infer that us guys are genetically predisposed to try to cheat the system. Mike, wondering if the IRS will buy this excuse :D From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Fri Feb 23 02:43:42 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 21:43:42 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face (WARNING-NOT FOR THE SQUEAMISH) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000f01c756f4$72099cb0$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165340 --Ceridwen wrote-- >>>The reasoning is, if Dumbledore had died on the tower, his heart would have stopped pumping blood at that moment. The AK was directed at his chest. The AK, according to canon, kills instantly. Therefore, when he was found at the base of the tower, there should not have been a trail of blood from his mouth as the blood would all have settled low in the body due to gravity. Dumbledore did not, as Harry saw, fall headfirst, and he didn't apparently land on his head. He was on his back. So, the blood would not have been able to go upward without a beating heart to pump it to the mouth. I'm not a forensics expert so I can't say for sure. But it does sound like a sticking point, *if* JKR knows this much about forensics and is not going for the visual effect here. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- Actually, according to forensic experts, this is what happens; "Once the heart stops beating, blood collects in the most dependent parts of the body (livor mortis), the body stiffens (rigor mortis), and the body begins to cool (algor mortis). The blood begins to settle in the parts of the body that are the closest to the ground, usually the buttocks and back when a corpse is supine. The skin, normally pink-colored because of the oxygen-laden blood in the capillaries, becomes pale as the blood drains into the larger veins. Within minutes to hours after death, the skin is discolored by livor mortis, or what embalmers call "postmortem stain," the purple-red discoloration from blood accumulating in the lowermost (dependent) blood vessels. Immediately after death, the blood is "unfixed" and will move to other body parts if the body's position is changed. After a few hours, the pooled blood becomes "fixed" and will not move. ..." - http://www.deathreference.com/Py-Se/Rigor-Mortis-and-Other-Postmortem-Change s.html In other words, although the heart may stop pumping blood, the blood doesn't just simply fall and collect in the feet at that instant. It moves and pools in the dependant parts (would the brain be considered dependent?) and can move if the body's position is changed. I.E. It falls off of a tower. This is not an instantaneous process, but takes several minutes and the blood would collect in the lower dependent parts over time. If he was face down, blood would pool in the chest area, but if he landed on his back, it would pool in the buttocks and spinal region. Only if the body were hung, would the blood pool in the feet and legs, and that would take a while to occur. "The following is not for everyone and can upset some, only read if you really want to Moment of Death: 1} The heart stops 2} The skin gets tight and grey in color 3} All the muscles relax 4} The bladder and bowels empty . . . .4a - Men will get an erection. No, I don't know when, exactly. I really didn't feel like calling up the local mortuary and asking this. And there's people on my mailing list I could have asked, I bet, but it's kind of weird popping up and asking that. No pun intended. I'm not sure my parents know what erections are, so I can't ask them. I did read that this was one of the reasons hangings were so well attended by women, back in the old.days. Big Laffs, seeing the Hung, hung. 5} The body's temperature will typically drop 1.5 degrees F. per hour unless outside environment is a factor. The liver is the organ that stays warmest the longest, and this temperature is used to establish time of death if the body is found within that time frame. After 30 minutes: 6} The skin gets purple and waxy 7} The lips, finger- and toe nails fade to a pale color or turn white as the blood leaves. 8} Blood pools at the lowest parts of the body leaving a dark purple-black stain called lividity 9} The hands and feet turn blue 10} The eyes start to sink into the skull After 4 hours: 11} Rigor mortis starts to set in 12} The purpling of the skin and pooling of blood continue 13} Rigor Mortis begins to tighten the muscles for about another 24 hours, then will reverse and the body will return to a limp state. " - http://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forensic-science/rigor-mortis-19044.html Even if the blood had already begun to drain into the lower extremities, either the force of the AK hitting the chest or the force of impact on the ground could have forced a blood spray from the mouth, just as if you dropped a water balloon, the water would spray out of the weakest point which would be the opening if the balloon was untied. This is similar to performing CPR. The heart has stopped, and we can use physical force to pump the blood for the heart and try to revive the heart. A severe trauma, such as the impact of falling from the tower or being hit forcefully in the chest could cause one forceful rush of blood. Another possibility is if Dumbledore had internal injuries from drinking the potion in the cave. He may have had blood in his throat or mouth already which might be forced to spray out upon impact. So, I don't think that a trail of blood from Dumbledore's mouth is in any way proof of pre AK mortem. I don't think it disproves your theory either. There is much more to forensic science than what is revealed from this simple blood trail and without a complete investigation, it is impossible to determine from the evidence provided. I'm sorry that some of this is graphic, but since we are discussing forensic evidence, I think it's relevant. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Fri Feb 23 03:51:18 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 19:51:18 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Potions, the Book, and a New/Old Perspective In-Reply-To: <001401c756d6$0195e7e0$63fe54d5@Marion> References: <001401c756d6$0195e7e0$63fe54d5@Marion> Message-ID: <2795713f0702221951y7e7e6feci45af911987185742@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165341 Ronin: The thing that really gets me is that Hermione seems completely out of character all throughout HBP. She is on her moral high horse about Harry using the Prince's notes, yet she herself writes his homework for him at times, knowing that Ron will also copy HER work Lynda: To me, Hermione seemed just as always, only a little more tetchy because Harry is doing better than her in potions and because of the Ron/Lavender pairing. And she doesn't let Harry copy her work until after Ron's poisoning, when they are friends again, so that doesn't seem so out of character to me. Whatever, though. I wouldn't want her mad at me. Not with that canary spell she uses to such effect... Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Feb 23 03:55:49 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 22:55:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bloodlines and talent (Was: To the Extreme) References: Message-ID: <009d01c756fe$824a2e50$ac80400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165342 Snow again: This was the point I was trying to address...Lucius was upset that a muggleborn whoops his son in grades with little concern that this muggleborn who was also a girl who was also a Gryffindor was the victor. What seems to be utterly more important to Lucius is that she is muggleborn more so than the fact she is a girl or which house she belonged to. Magpie: Right. Lucius says to Draco that as a Pureblood he "ought to be ashamed" that she beat him in all their exams. He is also upset at blood "not mattering" as much any more. (If being Pureblood doesn't matter he loses power.) Snow: Lucius' rant could certainly be put off as simply a prejudice to muggleborns but where did Lucius, or anyone like him, form this prejudice? Where did it come from if it is just prejudice, was it simply an inherited disposition from Slytherin? Is there some type of foundation for the reason behind this prejudice? Magpie: Or Wizards consider Muggles inferior, and Muggleborns come from Muggles. They are outsiders. They might "take over" the way that people often feel new groups will "take over" when they arrive. Muggleborns having equal power could be just as bad as their having super powers. Snow: What plants the seed of prejudice; indifference towards those who are unlike you or is it simply fear; Or...in my suspicion, both. These non-purebloods or mudbloods exhibit power, some exhibiting much greater power than some purebloods. Could these persons have been viewed as a threat? Magpie: Sure. And some Muggle-borns will exhibit more power than some Purebloods. But not, it seems to me, to the point of Muggleborns being superior wizards as a "race." Hermione could have talents Sirius doesn't, Sirius could have talents Lupin doesn't etc. Snow: Why did Slytherin object so fiercely over teaching anyone other than purebloods? Everyone seemed to be getting along well enough to raise the school in the beginning to each Founder's individual values, so what changed? Why did the other three founders at the time not have the same objection as Slytherin? Were any of the remaining three Founders not pureblood? If they were not pureblood, why didn't Slytherin object to them from the beginning if he had such a prejudice, if they were also pureblood, why didn't they savor Slytherin's objection? Magpie: Good question. The hat says that they all started to fight, and stopped when Slytherin left, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything about their blood. They may have all been Purebloods, or not have objected to Slytherin's idea. He got his house full of Purebloods, iirc, and perhaps that was enough for him. Snow: We were told that Slytherin would only teach those whose ancestry was purest when the school began, which tells me that there were children whose ancestry was less than pure and yet he didn't have difficulty with that issue at the time. What changed? Magpie: Slytherin may definitely be misunderstood after all this time. Perhaps Tom Riddle's idea of Slytherin's "noble work" with the basilisk weren't really what Slytherin was planning. Snow again: There is no doubt whatsoever that Neville is the product of purebloods and is a pureblood himself, what is significant to me is his lack of magic for having such a background and even more so his not being Chosen as Voldemort's target if pureblood status was in itself the greater threat. Why did Dumbledore purposely point out the fact that Voldemort did not choose the pureblood but a half-blood like himself? Is Dumbledore implying that Voldemort should naturally have viewed the pureblood as more of a threat or is it more telling that Voldemort saw the half-blood (like himself) as more of a threat? Magpie: Well, he was choosing his "equal" and since Voldemort was obsessed with blood it may have just seemed obvious to him to choose the one who was his equal blood-wise. Neville doesn't really have a lack of magic, necessarily. He lacks confidence more than he lacks magic, it seems. I think Dumbledore was pointing out the irony that he chose Harry, who would one day destroy him. Voldemort's own obsession with blood led to his own destiny. Snow again: I understand where you are coming from but what I was basically talking about was Ron's overall performance as a competent pureblood wizard compared to Harry's performance (whose maternal grandparent's were muggle) or the muggleborn Hermione's. Ron, the pureblood, doesn't size up well, magically speaking, just against these two non-purebloods. This is not to say Ron is worthless or not talented, it is just that he exhibits less magical tendency than the other two who are not of pure blood. Magpie: I think there's more things involved in schoolwork and other things than just magical power. But regardless, even if Ron is inferior (seemingly) to Hermone and Harry, neither Hermione nor Harry can come up with the stuff the Twins do. I think it all evens out when you look at individuals instead of using Hermione as standing in for all Muggleborns and pitting her against others. Just in general, in the real world, it's usually not a good idea to start drawing conclusions about someone's "race" (though that might not be the right word) based on single examples. Snow: My point wasn't that pureblood Draco isn't any good (although I do question his grades), it's the fact that muggleborn Hermione's is better. It is true that Hermione is anal over her studies but a person with no talent could study till the cows come home and it won't make much of a difference, in the end talent is a key ingredient. Draco has been use to preferential treatment (as was quoted above) at least from Snape and doesn't seem to be concerned with studies. I know from personal experience that kids in school, whose parent is on the school board, definitely get preferential treatment. The same could be true with Lucius position at the Ministry. How can we be positive Lucius didn't have influence over the OWL examiners, could it not be possible? Lucius has displayed his ability to control situations by using threats like he did when the governors discharged Dumbledore in COS. Magpie: We don't know how much Draco studies. He's got a demanding father--that's a good canonical reason for him to be quite interested in studies. We know he's got at least an E in Transfig, an O in Potions. He's never been shown having trouble in school--and Harry sees grades early on in the series. It's of course possible there are students who are as smart or smarter than Hermione but don't work as hard and don't do as well on tests and things. Of course, now we're also getting into another area of brains, which gets mixed up with power in canon as well. Plus some students are better in different subjects or skills than others. It seems as hard to judge Wizards against each other sometimes as it is people. Lucius in OotP (when OWLS are) is in jail, and he's already been kicked off the school board years before. Albus Dumbledore runs Hogwarts and is not about to give Draco preferential treatment gradewise--we already know Draco does not get preferential treatment (outside of Snape liking him, and other students are favorites of different teachers too) at Hogwarts. Your personal experience of kids on the schoolboard does not fit with Draco at Hogwarts, who doesn't get rules broken for him. JKR even puts in a line where Draco is trying to scare people with the idea that it's "who you know," only to have Neville reveal he's just bluffing. It's Neville whose family is friends with the examiner--not somebody under Lucius' thumb. So I see no reason to question Draco's grades at all. Certainly not because a Pureblood. I think he gets better grades than Half-blood Harry in Potions and Harry gets better grades than Pureblood Draco in DADA. Hermione usually beats everyone in every subject except DADA, and presumably there are areas when she is beat by others. Harry's class happens to have a top student who's a Muggleborn. Previous years have probably have top students who were Purebloods or Halfbloods. I mean, this theory basically argues that Voldemort is *right*, only he's got the wrong blood group to call inferior. (And that blood group includes the Durlseys!) Snow: It seems almost representative of all the houses of Hogwarts uniting as one. Each one of the trio coming from different backgrounds would be equal to the four houses that each have a specific characteristic represented by their house. If the houses were to unite, they would also be a strong force. Magpie: I agree-but I think it's a bit undermined if the Trio are also ranked bloodwise, so that rather than each bringing their own strengths, Hermione's the best, then Harry and then Ron brings up the rear as the inferior Pureblood. Snow: You could very well be correct, Carol. I'm just considering a new viewpoint of the bloodline importance of these books. Lack of information can be equally as telling as canon fact. When I am not given a bloodline background on several powerful characters, like Dumbledore for instance, my first response is to question why? We were informed by JKR on her site that Dumbledore's background would be a profitable line of inquiry and yet we have almost nothing to go on so using the given canon is almost worthless. I feel we need to question areas where we have been denied helpful information. Why Dumbledore's bloodline could matter at all might depend on why blood matters so much in the first place. Magpie: But are we really supposed to wonder why we're not given the bloodlines of powerful characters, the first thing Draco Malfoy would ask as a first year? Dumbledore's family might be important, but as I think I said earlier I think family is a different thing than bloodline. It's like if I were black and my parents were good dancers, and I was a good dancer. It's one thing to say I inherited my dance talent from my parents. It's another to say I was a good dancer because I was black. (That is, of course, not supposed to imply that you make any kind of racist statement like that about real people.) -m From drdara at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 06:06:34 2007 From: drdara at yahoo.com (danielle dassero) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 22:06:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black Message-ID: <648911.332.qm@web60711.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165343 JKR said in an interview that Regulus was completely dead and wasn't going to come back alive in any way. I believe it's on her website as well. Danielle ----- Original Message ---- From: colebiancardi To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 4:50:22 PM Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black I was looking thru the HPL site and decided to look at this family tree that JKL drew. One thing that struck me was the year that Regulus died. Not that he died in 1979, but his father Orion ALSO died in 1979. Hmmmm....got me thinking DD offered to "hide" Draco & his mother from Voldemort (Lighting Struck Tower, HBP). DD's line about "He cannot kill you if you are already dead. Come over to the right side, Draco, and we can hide you more completely than you can possibly imagine. What is more, I can send members of the Order to your mother tonight to hide her likewise." Am Ed Hardcover pp 391-392. Sirius never talked a lot about his father. We know that Orion, from Sirius in OotP, was not a DeathEater. Could it be that DD hid not only Regulus, but Orion as well? The same offer he gave to Draco? Could it be that there maybe not just one, but two remaining Blacks? And will Harry meet up with them in DH? There is also Regulus's uncle Cygnus(the father of Bella & Cissy) who died in 1979. Oh my, what a web this tree is!! Did anyone else catch this on the family tree? The family tree link: http://www.hp- lexicon.org/ wizards/blackfam ilytree.html I also noticed that there is a Potter on the tree. A Charlus Potter who married Dorea. Could these be Harry's grandparents? James Potter was a pureblood and since neither Dorea or Charlus's names are blasted away from the tree, I can safely assume that Charlus was a pure-blood as well. Only Dorea has a birthdate & deathyear, so if we go by that (1920), she was an older mother for James. JRK stated that James' parents were older and died a natural death. Could it be??? colebiancardi( who does believe that Regulus is still standing after all these years) ____________________________________________________________________________________ Have a burning question? Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From muellem at bc.edu Fri Feb 23 12:20:04 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 12:20:04 -0000 Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: <648911.332.qm@web60711.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165344 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, danielle dassero wrote: > > JKR said in an interview that Regulus was completely dead and wasn't going to come back alive in any way. I believe it's on her website as well. > colebiancardi: Hmmm, I have read an interview with JKR that said that about DD (about being completely dead, etc) and Sirius(about being dead). However, what I have read about Regulus is that we've haven't been hearing too much from him lately. If you have some links to that interview about Regulus, I would greatly appreciate it, as I cannot find her stating that about Regulus, as she did with Dumbledore & Sirius. colebiancardi (Regulus LIVES!! (imho)) From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Feb 23 16:11:08 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:11:08 -0000 Subject: A bit of evil Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165345 > Alla: > > Lupin was suspected because he was a spy is not in my view a > straightforward interpretation, because by that token Sirius should > have been a spy as well. I do not remember any support for the idea > that there was more reason to suspect Lupin than Sirius. Pippin: Evidently James thought there was, because he didn't think Sirius was the spy. Alla: > And Peter did not sow distrust against Marauders? Peter, who fooled > everybody? Peter, who framed Sirius so brilliantly? I disagree. Pippin: Peter didn't frame Sirius by sowing distrust against him, he framed Sirius by accusing him openly, an accusation Sirius might have refuted if he'd kept his wits. It only worked because Sirius's laughter was taken as both proof and confession. How could Peter be sure that would happen? Peter wasn't brilliant, he was lucky. If Peter was telling people before GH that Sirius wasn't to be trusted, James would scarcely have expected him to be party to the secret keeper switch. > > Alla: > > Didn't JKR say that Wormtail was in fact using Voldemort's wand? ( > Don't remember for sure) Pippin: Argh! What I meant to say is that there's unequivocal evidence that the wand that killed Cedric is not the one Peter used to bind Harry. I can't think of an uncomplicated way to resolve this, given that the wand images are correct and that JKR said Wormtail killed Cedric using Voldemort's wand is correct. But who says the solution has to be uncomplicated? What I'm getting at is that once you acknowledge the existence of a mystery in canon, the assumption that the apparent solution is incorrect and the actual solution is probably complicated is straightforward. When have we had a mystery resolved where the real solution wasn't more complex than the apparent one? Pippin agreeing with Alla that betting Lupin is not evil is bold From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Feb 23 16:32:25 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 11:32:25 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face Message-ID: <8293778.1172248345498.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165346 From: houyhnhnm102 >If the factoid "dead bodies can't bleed" is a staple >of detective fiction, I would expect Rowling to be >familiar with that. I'm inclined to see the blood >on DD's face as one more clue that events on the >tower were not as they appeared. Bart: It is not. It is more how HARD they bleed (at least in detective fiction). In larger bookstores, in the writing section, there are several series of books designed as sourcebooks for writers; I own several of them, and have read others. According to my memory of what I have read, recently dead bodies DO bleed; it is the RATE of bleeding that shows the difference (note one of the many strangenesses of the OJ Simpson murder case; the lack of blook on OJ's body and clothing). Another case where postmortem bleeding was important was the killing (accidental or otherwise) of Mary Jo Kopechne in Senator Ted Kennedy's car. Although several people testified to the presence of blood in several odd places which would contradict Senator Kennedy's story, inspection of evidence that would confirm or deny this was blocked by Massachussetts courts. Let's see if we can give a list of the key questions about Dumbledore's death: 1) Is he really dead? 2) Is he completely dead or just mostly dead? 3) Was he dead BEFORE the AK spell was cast? 4) Was the proximate cause of death the AK spell? 5) Was it a real AK spell, or a fake covering up the real spell? 6) How did he get levitated over the roof? 7) Was he actively and irretrievably dying before the AK spell was cast? 8) Whose orders was Snape following? 9) What was the effect of the poison he had taken (it certainly was poison, whehter or not it was DEADLY poison)? 10) Why was there blood on Dubmbledore's face? Can anybody think of more? Bart From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 17:01:31 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:01:31 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: <8293778.1172248345498.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165347 > Bart: > It is not. It is more how HARD they bleed (at least in detective fiction). zgirnius: Pippin is also raising the issue of how *long* they bleed. Dumbledore still had a wet trickle of blood on his face after all the events of "The Flight of the Prince", which she estimates took 30 minutes. (I think it could be rather less, myself, nonetheless, it was some time). As far as JKR's knowledge - am I confused, or is her husband a medical doctor? I think if she meant this to be a clue, she certainly had the resources to go to to get the right answer. On the other hand, if she wanted a convenient tender gesture for Harry to make, she proabbly wouldn't bother to worry about time elapsed, hearts not beating, etc. It is a nice moment. Bart: > Let's see if we can give a list of the key questions about Dumbledore's death: > > 1) Is he really dead? > 2) Is he completely dead or just mostly dead? > 3) Was he dead BEFORE the AK spell was cast? > 4) Was the proximate cause of death the AK spell? > 5) Was it a real AK spell, or a fake covering up the real spell? > 6) How did he get levitated over the roof? > 7) Was he actively and irretrievably dying before the AK spell was cast? > 8) Whose orders was Snape following? > 9) What was the effect of the poison he had taken (it certainly was poison, whehter or not it was DEADLY poison)? > 10) Why was there blood on Dubmbledore's face? zgirnius: A list! I would add, 11 )did Snape and Dumbledore know throughout the book that Dumbledore's condition from the Ring Curse was terminal? I don't believe this myself, but it is a fairly popular theory. on 7), there is an in between sort of possibility no included in the question - that he was not dying irretrievably, but required prompt attention by an expert of Snape's caliber to survive. (Attention Snape could not give because of the Vow. Literally - he would drop dead from trying). One might ask also what Dumbledore meant by his plea, though perhaps you'd stick that under 8). From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Feb 23 17:34:33 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:34:33 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165349 "justcarol67" > I'm assuming that Dumbledore knows > all about the UV based on his comment > to Harry after Harry tells him about > the overheard conversation between > Snape and Draco. You're half right. Dumbledore did indeed believe that Snape told Draco that he had taken an unbreakable vow, but it's clear he didn't really think Snape had done it. I can't think of any other interpretation given the dialogue below: Draco said to Dumbledore "He [Snape] hasn't been doing your orders, he promised my mother_" Dumbledore replied "Of course that is what he would tell you Draco, but_" Unlike Dumbledore we readers know Snape didn't just say he'd made the vow, he really had. And there is no "but" about it. > As for Snape's reasons for taking the UV > [ ] he'd gone to great pains to protect > his cover and provide explanations for > the breaches in his loyalty to Voldemort > that a fanatical DE like Bellatrix would understand As I said before if JKR wants a good Snape she's going to have to find a HUGE reason for him making that vow, an your reason is way way too puny. Bellatrix is not Snape's boss, if Voldemort didn't demand that he make that vow she certainly can't. The only way I can think of to make it work is that Snape was only vowing to do what he had every intention of doing anyway, to help Draco and kill Dumbledore if Draco failed to do so. But that is incompatible with a good Snape. If JKR wants a good Snape she's going to have to work very hard for it, harder than any of us has. > It's only the third provision, which he > clearly didn't anticipate given the twitch, > that presents a problem. At one stroke that literary device would turn a brilliant enigma, one of the most interesting characters in the books, into a laughing stock. Only a jackass would vow to do things when he didn't even know what he was vowing to do. > the UV in itslef does not prove that > he's not Dumbledore's man. I think it does prove it, unless someone (like JKR) can come up with a sensible reason a good Snape would make that crazy vow. I'm not saying such a reason can't exist, maybe we'll learn of it on July 21, but I haven't heard it yet. > We're seeing the look of hatred and > revulsion from Harry's pov No, the book said it looked like Snape was full of hate not that Harry thought he did. > I stated that they could indicate self-hatred Yes, but I found your explanation less than convincing. The facial expressions one has when undergoing self-hatred are quite different than when one hates someone else. If you looked at Harry when he was forcing that potion down Dumbledore's throat do you think we would see hatred etched into the harsh lines of Harry's face? I don't think we would. > If the AK is a cover for some other > spell, he didn't actually murder DD It's perfectly acceptable for an author to try to mislead a reader, but she must play fair. We saw Snape point his wand at Dumbledore, we heard him utter the dreaded words, we saw green bolts shoot out of his wand, we saw them hit Dumbledore, we saw him die and fall off the tower. If that doesn't mean that Dumbledore is dead and Snape killed him with the AK then JKR has crossed the line from misleading her readers to being dishonest with them. > If someone *must* kill Dumbledore, and > if it's the only way to save Draco's > life, better Snape than Draco. I hope JKR doesn't pursue this, trading Dumbledore's life for slime ball Draco seems like a poor idea and a very poor plot element. As to how all this will turn out, there might be some ambiguity about Snape even at the end of the last book. Or maybe there will be a compromise between the good Snape and the bad Snape people that both can live with. Perhaps during most of the last book it would seem that Snape haters like me were right after all, but then just seconds before his death Snape saves Harry's life. However nearly everybody thinks it was just a lucky fluke and they still think Snape was evil and they're glad he's dead. The one exception is Harry Potter who for various reasons now thinks Snape was good from day one, although he can't convince anybody else of this, or thank Snape for it. Eggplant From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Feb 23 17:58:11 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:58:11 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165350 Ceridwen: Wrote: > the blood would not have been able to > go upward without a beating heart > to pump it to the mouth. I don't care what pulp fiction detective stories say, if you drop a dead body off a 300 foot tower when it hits the ground not only would blood spurt upward it would spurt EVERYWHERE. If JKR can be criticized it would be for having far too little blood in that scene, not too much. Eggplant From muellem at bc.edu Fri Feb 23 18:03:16 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:03:16 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165351 "eggplant107" wrote: > > > I don't care what pulp fiction detective stories say, if you drop a > dead body off a 300 foot tower when it hits the ground not only would > blood spurt upward it would spurt EVERYWHERE. If JKR can be criticized > it would be for having far too little blood in that scene, not too much. colebiancardi: which actually brings up a good point. If DD was killed immediately when Snape AK'd him, then DD would have been flung off the tower & hit the ground with such speed & force that DD's body would be flat as a pancake with lots of blood, guts and gore splattered everywhere. So, based on that, I still believe that Snape released DD from whatever was killing him (for me, it is the cursed ring that did it) and DD controlled his own fall because he was still alive, although very weak and dying. I believe DD died after he reached the bottom of the tower. colebiancardi From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Feb 23 18:26:40 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:26:40 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165352 Carol: > > > I'm assuming that Dumbledore knows > > all about the UV based on his comment > > to Harry after Harry tells him about > > the overheard conversation between > > Snape and Draco. Eggplant: > You're half right. Dumbledore did indeed believe that Snape told Draco > that he had taken an unbreakable vow, but it's clear he didn't really > think Snape had done it. I can't think of any other interpretation > given the dialogue below: > > Draco said to Dumbledore "He [Snape] hasn't been doing your orders, he > promised my mother_" > Dumbledore replied "Of course that is what he would tell you Draco, > but_" > > Unlike Dumbledore we readers know Snape didn't just say he'd made the > vow, he really had. And there is no "but" about it. Magpie: That doesn't mean Dumbledore thinks Snape didn't really take the vow. Draco is saying, "Snape hasn't been doing your orders, he promised my mother..." And Dumbledore could easily be replying, "Of course that's what he would tell you, that he is protecting you for your mother's sake, but in fact I want you protected too." Dumbledore knows Draco's trying to kill him, he's heard that Snape has made an Unbreakable Vow. What Dumbledore is saying here in no way means he *must* think Snape only told Draco about the Vow and didn't really take it. After all, who says Draco knows about the Vow just because Snape told him? Bellatrix and Narcissa were there too. Dumbledore could absolutely know that the Vow was real and still being correcting Draco's impression that Snape's not working for Dumbledore but really working for Voldemort. Those are the two stories we're being presented with--either Draco's right or Dumbledore is. Eggplant: > As I said before if JKR wants a good Snape she's going to have to find > a HUGE reason for him making that vow, an your reason is way way too > puny. Bellatrix is not Snape's boss, if Voldemort didn't demand that > he make that vow she certainly can't. The only way I can think of to > make it work is that Snape was only vowing to do what he had every > intention of doing anyway, to help Draco and kill Dumbledore if Draco > failed to do so. But that is incompatible with a good Snape. If JKR > wants a good Snape she's going to have to work very hard for it, > harder than any of us has. Magpie I think Snape agreeing to do it because he was going to do it anyway is incompatable with lots of Snapes too, because why on earth does ESE!Snape want to put his life on the line for anyone? It's not the killing Dumbledore that's a problem with him, it's the "die if you don't" that is. But regardless, you say "if JKR wants a good Snape she's going to have to work very hard for it" almost as if that's a *bad* thing. I thought the point of HBP was to set up this impossible looking situation where Snape's agreeing to kill Dumbledore and later goes through with it. I imagine if Snape is DDM JKR can't *wait* to give us her huge reason he took the vow (and I agree it's not, imo, going to have anything to do with Snape having to go through with it for Bellatrix or anyone like that). Carol: > > It's only the third provision, which he > > clearly didn't anticipate given the twitch, > > that presents a problem. Eggplant: > At one stroke that literary device would turn a brilliant enigma, one > of the most interesting characters in the books, into a laughing > stock. Only a jackass would vow to do things when he didn't even know > what he was vowing to do. Magpie: I agree--which is why I'm holding out for JKR to pull that huge reason out of her sleeve, one that will encompass everything Snape's done at once. No idea how she'll do it, but that's what I'm expecting. Carol: > > the UV in itslef does not prove that > > he's not Dumbledore's man. Eggplant: > I think it does prove it, unless someone (like JKR) can come up with a > sensible reason a good Snape would make that crazy vow. I'm not saying > such a reason can't exist, maybe we'll learn of it on July 21, but I > haven't heard it yet. Magpie: Me neither--and I honestly don't expect to hear it until July 21st. I think Snape is intentionally set up to look bad in this scene, and I think he's doing everything he appears to do, taking a vow to kill Dumbledore or die and then following through on it. I don't expect any explanations about how he didn't really make that vow, or made it by accident, or had to make it. Carol: > > > We're seeing the look of hatred and > > revulsion from Harry's pov Eggplant: > No, the book said it looked like Snape was full of hate not that Harry > thought he did. Magpie: The narrator is giving us Harry's pov throughout the scene. I think we're definitely in third-person limited there. Snape looking like he's full of hatred and revulsion doesn't tell us what the hatred and revulsion is for. (If he wants to kill Dumbledore he might not have shown revulsion at all, but satisfaction. I don't think Snape, if he was called upon to kill Sirius at the end of PoA, thinking he was the traitor, would look repulsed.) Carol: > > I stated that they could indicate self-hatred Magpie: > > Yes, but I found your explanation less than convincing. The facial > expressions one has when undergoing self-hatred are quite different > than when one hates someone else. If you looked at Harry when he was > forcing that potion down Dumbledore's throat do you think we would see > hatred etched into the harsh lines of Harry's face? I don't think we > would. Magpie: Sure we might. JKR loves showing us expressions that aren't completely explained from the outside until you know what's going on. Snape can hate what he's having to do. Harry is in a different situation in the cave, but I think the parallel is still significant, if not parallel. Carol: > > > If the AK is a cover for some other > > spell, he didn't actually murder DD Eggplant: > > It's perfectly acceptable for an author to try to mislead a reader, > but she must play fair. We saw Snape point his wand at Dumbledore, we > heard him utter the dreaded words, we saw green bolts shoot out of his > wand, we saw them hit Dumbledore, we saw him die and fall off the > tower. If that doesn't mean that Dumbledore is dead and Snape killed > him with the AK then JKR has crossed the line from misleading her > readers to being dishonest with them. Magpie: I agree with you there. I'm holding out for plain vanilla AK. What a shame if it was taken back. Carol: > > > If someone *must* kill Dumbledore, and > > if it's the only way to save Draco's > > life, better Snape than Draco. Eggplant: > > I hope JKR doesn't pursue this, trading Dumbledore's life for slime > ball Draco seems like a poor idea and a very poor plot element. Magpie: If DD was trading his life for Draco's--and I don't think that's literally what he's doing--it would go beyond trading one life for another. If anything Dumbledore's death is going to say something about his philosophy of life in general, imo. It's not, imo, a trade of victims. And I also think it will pay off far beyond Draco being alive. That, imo, will be important--I think if anything characters who insist on dismissing Draco as simply a slimeball will turn out to be the ones at a disadvantage (Voldemort among them). Eggplant: Perhaps during most of the last book it would seem that > Snape haters like me were right after all, but then just seconds > before his death Snape saves Harry's life. However nearly everybody > thinks it was just a lucky fluke and they still think Snape was evil> and they're glad he's dead. The one exception is Harry Potter who for> various reasons now thinks Snape was good from day one, although he> can't convince anybody else of this, or thank Snape for it. Magpie: Since Harry pretty much is the spokesman for Snape haters, that doesn't seem to naturally follow. Nobody else is invested in hating Snape or thinking he's evil. -m From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Feb 23 18:39:02 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:39:02 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165353 "justcarol67" wrote: > Snape's AK on the tower is an anomaly, > different in many respects from the > other AKs we've seen. But how many AK's have we SEEN before? I would say approximately none; we've only seen the after effects. Harry's eyes were closed when Cedric died, he just saw a green flash through his eyelids and heard a flop when he fell dead. We don't see the AK that killed Voldemort's father and grandparents but it caused no physical damage, we don't see the AK that killed Harry's parents either but apparently it destroyed a house. Face it, we just don't know a lot about the AK except that it kills. Eggplant From deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 18:52:43 2007 From: deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com (Deborah Krupp) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 10:52:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: <8293778.1172248345498.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <307305.23123.qm@web35006.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165354 Bart wrote: Let's see if we can give a list of the key questions about Dumbledore's death: 1) Is he really dead? 2) Is he completely dead or just mostly dead? 3) Was he dead BEFORE the AK spell was cast? 4) Was the proximate cause of death the AK spell? 5) Was it a real AK spell, or a fake covering up the real spell? 6) How did he get levitated over the roof? 7) Was he actively and irretrievably dying before the AK spell was cast? 8) Whose orders was Snape following? 9) What was the effect of the poison he had taken (it certainly was poison, whehter or not it was DEADLY poison)? 10) Why was there blood on Dubmbledore's face? Can anybody think of more? deborah wrote: I am not certain the green potion was poison. I don't think it was a health tonic, but it caused Dumbledore to behave in a strange way and made him very thirsty. As Dumbledore told us, Voldemort wouldn't have wanted the one retrieving his Horcrux to die, at least not right away. Voldemort would have wanted to see who it was and how he managed the task. Consider for a moment that Harry couldn't conjure water for Dumbledore. Anyone else think that lake was filled with "Draught of living death," the first potion Snape introduced in Harry's first potions' class? Could this have played a role in the events that followed? If Dumbledore's death were being "stoppered" would draught of living death have had less effect on him? Clearly, Dumbledore is already borrowing time somehow. My thought on the green potion is that it actually was a Horcrux. I know we are supposed to believe the locket is the Horcrux, but, and this is a big IF, if Dumbledore were part of RAB, (Rubeus, Albus, Black) or if Regulus Black retrieved the locket and handed it over to Dumbledore (are Regulus and Orion actually dead, or hidden under Dumbledore's protection - remember he was confident he could hide Draco and his mother), Dumbledore could have released the soul part back into the potion, hoping that Voldemort himself would come drink it. Which ties into my idea that Dumbledore actually wants Tom to live, and only to vanquish the dark lord, but that's another thread. Obviously, with his own death impending, Dumbledore could not take the chance of leaving the potion Horcrux there, and had to drink it himself allowing it to be destroyed with his own death. He knew immediately it had to be drunk, and did not even try to get rid of it in a different way. He took the locket to protect Regulus, so if Voldemort were to return, he wouldn't start looking for him and get suspicious. I am absolutely certain Dumbledore is really and absolutely dead. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Feb 23 19:45:39 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:45:39 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165355 Eggplant: > I don't care what pulp fiction detective stories say, if you drop a dead body off a 300 foot tower when it hits the ground not only would blood spurt upward it would spurt EVERYWHERE. If JKR can be criticized it would be for having far too little blood in that scene, not too much. Ceridwen: Well, as I said, I'm no forensics expert. A few people have answered that particular point. Thanks, by the way, to those who did! The way bodies bleed is mysterious to me. Road-kill doesn't seem to have a lot of blood, despite severe trauma to the body; a cut finger or lip seems to pour out gallons of blood. Could the fall from a 300 foot tower send the blood out like that, or would it clamp the veins shut, like being rolled over by the wheels of a train? So, maybe it isn't necessarily the presence of blood, but too little blood and gore that is the something people sense as wrong with DD's body after the fall. Of course our minds jump to what we know (pulp fiction detective stories). Do you think the *lack* of so much gore is odd or telling? Or is JKR merely using poetic visual license in this scene? I'd like to read some more thoughts on this. Ceridwen. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 19:52:39 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:52:39 -0000 Subject: Bloodlines and talent (Was: To the Extreme) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165356 Snow wrote: > > This was the point I was trying to address...Lucius was upset that a muggleborn whoops his son in grades with little concern that this muggleborn who was also a girl who was also a Gryffindor was the victor. What seems to be utterly more important to Lucius is that she is muggleborn more so than the fact she is a girl or which house she belonged to. > > Lucius' rant could certainly be put off as simply a prejudice to muggleborns but where did Lucius, or anyone like him, form this prejudice? Where did it come from if it is just prejudice, was it simply an inherited disposition from Slytherin? Is there some type of foundation for the reason behind this prejudice? > > What plants the seed of prejudice; indifference towards those who are unlike you or is it simply fear; Or...in my suspicion, both. These non-purebloods or mudbloods exhibit power, some exhibiting much greater power than some purebloods. Could these persons have been viewed as a threat? Carol responds: Lucius is merely annoyed with Draco for allowing a single student, a "Mudblood," to get better marks than he did. I agree that it's her blood status, not her sex or House, that concerns Lucius. But that's because he regards "Mudbloods" as inferior beings. (Notice that both Draco and Narcissa act as if Muggleborns literally stink. Draco claims (in GoF) that Hermione will slime up his hand if she touches him.) > I don't see any indication that Draco is a poor student, as you imply later, nor do I see any sign of fear of "Mudbloods" in the example you cite or those I mentioned. As far as any of the Malfoys are concerned, Muggleborns are inferior beings, and Lucius thinks that Draco should be ashamed that a Muggleborn beat him at anything. But it's not Muggleborns, plural, as if all the Muggleborns in his year were outcompeting him. (Dean Thomas, for example, is considered a Muggleborn whether he is or not, and he's not mentioned, presumably because his marks are lower than Draco's.) As or why Muggleborns are viewed as a threat, I don't think it's because of superior abilities. To take an example that has nothing to do with CoS, it's clear to the reader, at least, that the Half-Blood Prince's/Teen!Snape'e Potions skills exceed Hermione's. She's a very good student even with an inferior textbook and an excellent student with Snape's instructions, but he's a genius who develops his own potions improvements. Blood has nothing to do with it since Harry is a Half-Blood, too. And Draco and Ernie Macmillan, both purebloods, earned Os to get into that class, as did Muggleborn Hermione and various Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs of unknown extraction. (Since Theo Nott's father is a Death Eater and Blaise Zabini sneers at Ginny for being a blood traitor, it seems a safe bet that they, like Draco, are purebloods. And note Slughorn's surprise that a Muggleborn, whether Lily or Hermione, would do well in Potions.) Where does this prejudice come from? Not, I think, from a sense that purebloods are inferior to Muggleborns or Blacks would not be written off the family tree for marrying them. I think it's the other way around. Muggleborns, who appear to vary in talent, power, and intelligence as much as anyone else, are *perceived as* inferior, which is undoubtedly why they're considered unsuitable marriage partners in some pureblood families. Possibly, the purebloods fear that impure blood (Muggle blood) will increase the chance of Squib offspring. But, in any case, I think you're overgeneralizing. JKR is showing that the blood prejudice is unfounded, using Hermione as her chief example, but she isn't showing (IMO) that Muggleborns are *better* than anyone else. Who was more powerful, Lily or James? We don't know. But James was apparently powerful and definitely talented, and he was a pureblood. And as for Salazar Slytherin, possibly he was concerned with the prejudice of the Muggleborns' Muggle parents against witches and wizards prevalent at that time. Not that such concerns justify building a Chamber of Secrets with a Basilisk programmed to kill Muggleborns. but Slytherins in general (some more than others) seem to have inherited his prejudice and adapted it to their times and circumstances. Carol, who thinks that JKR wants readers to see blood prejudice as unfounded, not to set up reverse discrimination in its place From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 20:10:03 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 20:10:03 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165357 Carol earlier: > > > > You're still missing the main point, which is that *Harry is receiving credit for the HBP's research and creativity.* > > Mike: > I catch your point Carol . But I think many people are still > debating whether Harry was cheating or not in using the book. Having > read your "main point" phrased several ways exasperated> lends me to think that you do not ascribe to the > cheating part of this debate with regards to use of the book. Is that right? Instead, your main point, which I do agree with, is that Harry's > taken credit for the "Prince's" research smacks of plageristic > oppurtunism. Fundamentally, I would have liked Harry to have caught > Slughorn alone after class and told him that he was following > superior instructions from his marked up Potions book. Realistically, I understand Harry's reluctance to do so. Carol: I suppose our quibble is over the term cheating. As a former teacher who had to deal with, for example, students copying essays off the Internet which they claimed as their own, I do consider taking credit for other people's ideas cheating, especially when it's reflected in the student's marks. How "plagiaristic opportunism" could be anything other than cheating is beyond my comprehension. However, as long as you concede that it's intellectually dishonest to claim others' work as your own, I'm happy. If it's the word "cheating" that's the problem, then call it something else. > Mike: > And I think this stems from all the non-potion spells that Harry > wants to explore. Harry does not want to lose that oppurtunity and, > on a fundamental level, I don't believe it is Harry's place to point > out to Slughorn that he (Sluggy) assigned an inferior book for his > NEWT students. Moralistically, yes Harry should share his superior > instructions. IOW, his new reputation for potion brilliance is not as important to Harry as the chance of losing the oppurtunity to > discover all these cool new spells, imo. But...but, that does not > exonerate Harry from claiming credit by proxy of all the Prince's > work. > > It's this two pronged part of the problem that lies at the base of > this debate. Fess up to the Prince and lose the new spells or keep > quiet with the side result of him receiving undeserved acclaim for > potions brilliance. And with him not minding the accolades, that > swings it for Harry. It's a closer call for those of us that don't > think using the book is cheating. Carol responds: Oho! It's not *just* reluctance to give up the friend who's "helping" him attain an unearned reputation for brilliance in Potions. It's a reluctance to give up the source of those clever hexes and charms. That makes it all right, then. Carol, thanking Mike for conceding her main point but thinking that Harry is definitely choosing what's easy over what's right in this instance > From carodave92 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 21:08:14 2007 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:08:14 -0000 Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165358 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "colebiancardi" wrote: > snip > Could it be that there maybe not just one, but two remaining Blacks? >snip > colebiancardi(who does believe that Regulus is still standing after > all these years) Carodave replies: I think Kreacher is the proof that no other Blacks are still alive in OoTP. I just don't think that Kreacher would have obeyed Sirius if any other member of Sirius' immediate family was still alive to serve as his master. Also, there's no reason why Regulus and Orion could not have stayed on in 12 Grimmauld Place if still alive, since DEs do not know about the house, and Orion has placed numerous spells,etc. to keep it hidden. > Carodave From muellem at bc.edu Fri Feb 23 21:38:36 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:38:36 -0000 Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165360 >"carodave92" wrote: > I think Kreacher is the proof that no other Blacks are still alive in > OoTP. I just don't think that Kreacher would have obeyed Sirius if > any other member of Sirius' immediate family was still alive to serve > as his master. Also, there's no reason why Regulus and Orion could not > have stayed on in 12 Grimmauld Place if still alive, since DEs do not > know about the house, and Orion has placed numerous spells,etc. to > keep it hidden. > colebiancardi: Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but it isn't that the DE's don't know about the house, but that they don't know that it is the headquarters of the Order of the Phoenix. Which came many years after 1979. And Mrs Black, Sirius & Regulus's mother, lived there until 1985 until her death. Regulus & Orion could not live there if other wizards, including their cousins, could come & go to 12 Grimmauld Place. Orion placed the many spells of concealment to make it unplottable, so that muggles could never find it. Not that other wizards couldn't. In my firm belief, which could change after 7/21, if DD hid Regulus (and maybe his father), it was done in such a way that it made Regulus seem dead to the rest of the world. Remember what DD told Draco - they cannot kill you if you are already dead. So, perhaps the enchantment that DD placed on those he "hid" was one that made them "unplottable" to others, including close friends and family members and house-elves, which would explain why Kreacher had to obey Harry after Sirius's death. Now that DD is dead himself, does that mean that the enchantment is now broken? (that is, if you believe in this theory) Will Regulus & maybe Orion be forced back out into the world and no longer hidden from the DE's and others? colebiancardi From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 21:41:53 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:41:53 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: <8293778.1172248345498.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165361 Bart wrote: > Let's see if we can give a list of the key questions about Dumbledore's death: > > 1) Is he really dead? > 2) Is he completely dead or just mostly dead? > 3) Was he dead BEFORE the AK spell was cast? > 4) Was the proximate cause of death the AK spell? > 5) Was it a real AK spell, or a fake covering up the real spell? > 6) How did he get levitated over the roof? > 7) Was he actively and irretrievably dying before the AK spell was cast? > 8) Whose orders was Snape following? > 9) What was the effect of the poison he had taken (it certainly was poison, whehter or not it was DEADLY poison)? > 10) Why was there blood on Dubmbledore's face? > > Can anybody think of more? Carol responds: How about those I raised and attempted to answer in the original post in this thread (along with a few others as they occur to me): Why does Dumbledore, unlike most AK victims, die with his eyes closed, looking like he's asleep, rather than with open eyes and a surprised or horrified expression, as he surely would if Snape had betrayed him? By the same token, why does his portrait look so peaceful? Why were no bones apparently broken in the fall? (DD was blasted over the wall yet floated for a moment like a rag doll; Did Snape cushion his fall?) Why does the AK itself behave so strangely (no blinding flash, no rushing sound)? Why did Harry take so long to unfreeze if DD died instantly? Can a nonverbal spell be disguised as or accompany an AK? What was the green-lit spell that seriously injured but didn't kill Tonks in the DoM? Can a silent message be sent from one Legilimens to another? If not, what was that exchanged look (before Snape raised his wand) about? What was the look of hatred and revulsion about, and the anguish resembling that of the dog in the burning house? How do we reconcile Snape's murder of Dumbledore with his behavior afterwards? (Why not just let the DEs run rampant through Hogwarts or Crucio and kidnap Harry, for example?) Why did Dumbledore want Harry to "wake Severus" and tell no one else what he was doing? Did Dumbledore know that he was going to die? If so, from what? How does the argument in the forest tie in with the events on the tower? Why did Dumbledore ignore Trelawney's warnings? How much did DD know about the UV and was there a plan? Where, if anywhere, does Snape's ability to "stopper death" fit in? What are the implications for Harry and Snape if it was the poison, not an AK, that killed Dumbledore? What would have happened if Snape had chosen to die with Dumbledore? Could either Harry or Draco have gotten off the tower alive? What does "Severus, please" mean? What, exactly, did DD want Snape to do? What was the Snape's motivation for taking the UV, especially the third provision? Would the events on the tower have occurred any differently without the UV? Why would Snape choose to give up everything--his freedom, his job, the trust of the Order--to become the second most wanted man in the WW, possibly even more hated than LV himself? Is life alone worth that much to him, or is he sacrificing everything to fight against Voldemort? Carol, who also wants to know how much Snape knows about Horcruxes and how he can possibly help Harry in DH but doesn't want to get too far off topic From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 21:59:06 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:59:06 -0000 Subject: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus Snape: Reflections on Books 1- In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165362 Reposting to include the link and clarify a point: Cassy wrote: > With apologies to Severus Snape, whom I agree did the right thing in conjuring the stretchers to save Harry, Ron and Hermione (and Black!) from the Dementors; my point is that if Snape had played it differently in the Shack, he could have captured Wormtail that night ... and he knows it. IMHO, it's terribly tragic that Snape, Lupin & Black were unable to understand one another sooner ... a cornered rat (even one so catastrophically underestimated as Pettigrew) should have been no match for three powerful members of the Order of the Phoenix, even without the (not inconsiderable) talents of the teenage trio. I have no wish to malign DDM!Snape (whom I admire greatly following HBP) but it's hard to overstate the magnitude of the disaster here ... "You ? you've got to hear me out," he [Black] croaked. "The rat ? look at the rat ?" (POA19) This was the dangerous corner, if you like, the moment when one future was lost: > Pettigrew's escape made Voldemort's return possible and Pettigrew's escape was only possible because Snape failed to listen to Sirius & Lupin and to unite with them at this moment. If he had done so then (even with the added complications of lycanthropy and the Dementors), I have little doubt that Wormtail would now be in Azkaban. > However, I would argue that JKR also points to Snape's culpability in this scene. There is evidence that he is too strongly motivated by a desire for revenge (and for personal vindication from Dumbledore), which leads him to take maverick action without reasonable precautions : "I've told the Headmaster again and again that you've been helping your old friend Black into the castle ... I shall be quite interested to see how Dumbledore takes this ... Vengeance is sweet ... How I hoped I would be the one to catch you ...". when Lupin transforms, Sirius defends the trio & Wormtail escapes. This is hardly the part that gallant DDM!Snape would have wished to play in events. > > So what would Snape's reaction have been to his debriefing from Dumbledore at the end of POA? To the knowledge that he has a) unwittingly aided Voldemort's servant to escape, b) so helping to fulfill a prophecy of Voldemort's return, c) allowed Voldemort's spy, *Wormtail*, to witness his immoderate fury, d) almost sent an innocent man to a fate he would not have wished on his worst enemy and e) potentially involved Dumbledore, Harry etc. in serious (no pun intended!) trouble with the Ministry? Of all the 'unseen scenes' so far, this is the one I would have most desired to witness since it would settle the question of Snape's loyalties once and for all! I think he would have been appalled. And for all the extenuating circumstances, he would have blamed himself. Carol responds: While I agree with you that Snape genuinely believes that Sirius Black is a murderer and Lupin is the werewolf accomplice who has been helping him into the school, that being knocked out prevents him from hearing the true story, and that here, as with many other characters (including Black, Harry himself, and possibly Lupin) JKR is showing the danger and futility of revenge, I don't agree that it's all Snape's fault and that he blames himself. If anything, his coming into the Shrieking Shack gets *Harry* to listen to Black. And, if it serves no other purpose (other than some interesting backstory on the MWPP/Snape dynamics, notably that Snape blames James's "arrogance" in not believing that Black was the spy for his death), it places him on the grounds to conjure stretchers and rescue HRH and Black from the werewolf and any stray Dementors who decide to return. Whether they realize it or not, it's a very good thing he was there (though, ironically, he still thinks that Black is a murderer and he's not at all happy, I'm sure, to find that he's been mistaken all those years. Just as Harry later displaces the blame for Sirius Black's death onto Snape, Snape has comfortably been displacing the blame for the Potters' deaths onto Black--and onto James himself for trusting him. It's not nearly as satisfying, I'm sure, to find that the traitor is Wormtail, who is worthy only of being despised rather than hated.) Nor do I think that Snape has any cause to blame himself for Wormtail's escape. Even if he had listened to Black's story (surely too much to expect under the circumstances, given that Black still hates him and shows no remorse whatever for leading Teen!Severus into the tunnel to meet a full-grown werewolf), events would have happened much as they did. Lupin would still have transformed, Sirius Black would still have fought him in dog form, and Pettigrew would still have transformed and escaped. (I suppose it's *possible* that Snape could have Stunned Rat!Pettigrew and used his own Patronus to drive off the Dementors, but then Snape would be the hero and the plot of the next two books could not have happened. And Harry's refusal to allow Black and Lupin to kill Pettigrew, with its ironic consequences, would be pointless.) At any rate, the lion's share of the blame for Pettigrew's escape lies with Lupin, who ran out of the Shrieking Shack without taking his potion, not with Snape, who was merely knocked out and later conjured the stretchers. What Snape regrets, I'm afraid, is that Black, the man he wanted to believe was a murdering traitor is only the would-be murderer of the real traitor, Pettigrew, and that the twelve years Black served in prison resulted not from his being a murderer but because he made the mistake of trusting that traitor (and going after him vigilante-style instead of going to the Aurors or Dumbledore with the truth). Snapes's righteous anger turns out to be unjustified. So by the time we get to OoP, Snape's only reason for hating Black is what it appeared to be in the Shrieking shack, the "schoolboy grudge": Black continues to hate him and call him Snivellus and to feel no regret for (in Snape's view) trying to murder him when they were both sixteen. It was not, however, the schoolboy grudge that caused him to behave as he did in the Shrieking Shack, IMO: he really thought that he was saving Harry from a loyal DE and his werewolf accomplice, and he expected gratitude that he didn't receive from the arrogant James Potter's "arrogant" son. At any rate, I've just read an essay on Snape at the Lexicon that I recommend to everyone even though I don't agree with all of it (especially the Lily/Snape arguments). http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/#static:bookseven/snape Here's what the writer, Michele Nanjo, has to say about Snape in the Shrieking Shack: "Rowling is a master at leading her readers astray, and Snape's grudge may just be her biggest red herring of all. Yes, the boys hated each other in school but it is probably not James's bullying alone that Snape can't forgive, or even Sirius's "trick" in sending him to the Shrieking Shack to face a werewolf when they were sixteen. There must be more to it than that and we get a glimpse of the hidden source of Snape's hatred in the Shrieking Shack in Prisoner of Azkaban when he snarls at Harry, "You'd have died like your father, too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black"28 "This line tells us two things. Snape truly believed that it was Sirius who had betrayed the Potters and he blames James at least as much for their deaths. If only James hadn't been so arrogant. . . . if only he'd done the smart thing and let Dumbledore act as Secret Keeper, then he and Lily would still be alive. "This isn't fair, of course. James never intended to risk the lives of his wife and son. But given Dumbledore's assertion that endangering the Potters was the "greatest regret of [Snape's] life"29 and that he turned spy at "great personal risk,"30 it is easy to understand Snape's bitterness towards James. Is this the wound that goes too deep for healing?-the secret fuel that keeps Snape's hatred burning? It is quite possible that Snape blames James because it helps to relieve his own crushing guilt, much in the same way that Harry blames Snape for Sirius's death to lighten his own guilt at the end of Order of the Phoenix. (ellipsis, brackets, and superscripts in original) I agree with this analysis. If Snape had a regret about the Shrieking Shack scene, it wasn't that *he* had allowed Wormtail to escape. That was Lupin's fault. It was that he'd blamed the wrong person for betraying the Potters. And he can hardly blame James's death on James's "arrogance" in trusting Black if Black was trustworthy after all. And Snape *did* save four lives that night at great personal risk from the werewolf and returning Dementors (unless he really does know an even better way of fighting them). And he even protects the kids from expulsion by telling Fudge that they were Confunded. He has, as far as I can see, nothing to regret except losing control in front of HRH--and the disappointment that the apparently murderous Sirius Black wasn't the traitor after all.) Carol, who sees no sign or regret or self-blame in Snape in this instance and no need for either From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 22:22:40 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:22:40 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165363 > >>Eggplant: > > It's perfectly acceptable for an author to try to mislead a > > reader, but she must play fair. We saw Snape point his wand at > > Dumbledore, we heard him utter the dreaded words, we saw green > > bolts shoot out of his wand, we saw them hit Dumbledore, we saw > > him die and fall off the tower. If that doesn't mean that > > Dumbledore is dead and Snape killed him with the AK then JKR has > > crossed the line from misleading her readers to being dishonest > > with them. > >>Magpie: > I agree with you there. I'm holding out for plain vanilla AK. What > a shame if it was taken back. Betsy Hp: I'm hopeful that it wasn't a real AK for one reason and one reason only: I want Snape to live. If Snape really *did* actively kill Dumbledore (rather than merely removing the life-support if you will) than I suspect he's going to die for moral reasons. As a murderer, JKR will have to kill him off, no matter the reason for the murder. Sort of like how in a gothic story, if the ingenue is actually raped by the villain she dies. Sure, she goes to heaven and everyone weeps for her and the hero tears his hair and rips his robes, but she's sullied and so she has to go. The whole, death as the final cleansing of the soul, I guess. I do agree though, that JKR can't just do a big reveal at the end if the AK is not what it seems. She'll have to drop hints early on in DH. But I *think* she's got enough time to do so. HBP ended so quickly after Dumbledore's death, maybe she didn't think it the place to start dropping more hints that things on the Tower were a little hinky? Betsy Hp From snapes_witch at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 22:53:03 2007 From: snapes_witch at yahoo.com (Elizabeth Snape) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:53:03 -0000 Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165364 Colebiancardi: > > > I also noticed that there is a Potter on the tree. A Charlus Potter > > who married Dorea. Could these be Harry's grandparents? > Goddlefrood: > > Again, didn't JKR say that these Potters were James's parents and > again I will supply the reference if I find it. > Snape's Witch: If this were true, Harry and Sirius would be cousins and we already know that the Dursleys are Harry's only living relatives. Personally I think Charlus Potter is a relative of James's father: brother, uncle, or cousin. On the other hand, Charlus could be no relation to James at all. Mark Evans, anyone? From va32h at comcast.net Fri Feb 23 22:58:46 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:58:46 -0000 Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165365 > colebiancardi: > In my firm belief, which could change after 7/21, if DD hid Regulus > (and maybe his father), it was done in such a way that it made ? >Regulus seem dead to the rest of the world. Remember what DD told >Draco - they cannot kill you if you are already dead. va32h here: I was also of the mind that Dumbledore hid Regulus. But the one thing that throws a wrench into that idea (for me) is the trip to the cave for the locket horcrux. If Regulus took the horcrux, and went to Dumbledore to help him hide from Voldemort, why doesn't Dumbledore already know that the locket is a fake? Wouldn't Regulus have told him about the cave? And if Regulus didn't tell Dumbledore all this - what reason would he have given Dumbledore that would compel DD to go to the trouble of hiding him? va32h From pfsch at gmx.de Fri Feb 23 23:03:16 2007 From: pfsch at gmx.de (Peter Felix Schuster) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 23:03:16 -0000 Subject: Risk about Fidelius Charm Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165366 Hi there, there's a thing that popped into my mind about what JK Rowling said about what happens when the Secret Keeper dies. So what if I go into hiding with the Fidelius Charm, and suddenly the Secret Keeper dies... I won't be able to tell anyone about my whereabouts, am I? With the order it's somewhat different because - if I got that correctly - Dumbledore was secret keeper for the order as such (ie not for each person in it). So nobody can say "the headquarter of the order is ...", but can say "I'll be at Weasley's tonight" even though he's member of the order. But if Dumbledore had died accidentily while Lily and James survived - would they have been able to tell about their whereabouts ever again? Or is the whole thing always bound to a certain place? Goodbite setrok From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 23:05:50 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 23:05:50 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165367 Carol earlier: > > > I'm assuming that Dumbledore knows all about the UV based on his comment to Harry after Harry tells him about the overheard conversation between Snape and Draco. > Eggplant: > You're half right. Dumbledore did indeed believe that Snape told Draco that he had taken an unbreakable vow, but it's clear he didn't really think Snape had done it. I can't think of any other interpretation given the dialogue below: > > Draco said to Dumbledore "He [Snape] hasn't been doing your orders, he promised my mother_" > Dumbledore replied "Of course that is what he would tell you Draco, > but_" > > Unlike Dumbledore we readers know Snape didn't just say he'd made the vow, he really had. And there is no "but" about it. Carol responds: Oh, yes. That favorite JKR tactic, the unfinished remark. Your interpretation makes sense, but it isn't the only possible interpretation. To begin with, if DD didn't know about the Unbreakable Vow already, why would Snape report that he had told Draco that story? He'd have to come up with a very quick and convincing explanation for telling such a whopping lie to Draco. It's possible that DD didn't know about the third provision of the vow, but I see absolutely no reason why he wouldn't tell DD about the first two (to protect and watch over Draco, which is exactly what Snape is doing when he finds Draco bleeding from Harry's Sectumsempra). And the first part of Dumbledore's sentence is perfectly true: Of course, that's what Snape would tell Draco. He's not going to tell him that he's also watching over him and protecting him on Dumbledore's orders! As for the "but," it can easily be filled in this way: "Of course that's what he would tell you, Draco, but he was also acting on my orders." I see no problem whatever with Snape, the double agent, working with Narcissa and for Dumbledore at the same time. But, of course, he's in the role of DE!Snape when he talks to Draco, and he's not going to say anything that would give away his true loyalties if they're to Dumbledore, or to lead Draco to suspect that he might be loyal to Dumbledore rather than LV even if he isn't. It's the situation with Bellatrix all over again: Regardless of where Snape's loyalties really lie, when he's with the DEs and their associates, he has to *seem* loyal to Voldemort. And Snape has certainly promised Dumbledore to do *something,* which Hagrid thinks is making investigations into his house (which would be his duty in any case). Carol earlier: > > As for Snape's reasons for taking the UV [ ] he'd gone to great pains to protect his cover and provide explanations for the breaches in his loyalty to Voldemort that a fanatical DE like Bellatrix would understand > Eggplant: > As I said before if JKR wants a good Snape she's going to have to find a HUGE reason for him making that vow, an your reason is way way too puny. Bellatrix is not Snape's boss, if Voldemort didn't demand that he make that vow she certainly can't. Carol: Now you're taking my remarks out of context. The comment about Bellatrix is only one item in my list. As I said, he took the vow in the first place to protect Draco. It's only when we get to the third provision that we have to examine the possibilities. And Bellatrix standing over him with a wand when his own wand hand is bound with rings of fire seems like a reasonable thing for him to have been thinking about under the circumstances. I never said that it was his primary reason. Eggplant: The only way I can think of to make it work is that Snape was only vowing to do what he had every intention of doing anyway, to help Draco and kill Dumbledore if Draco failed to do so. But that is incompatible with a good Snape. If JKR wants a good Snape she's going to have to work very hard for it, harder than any of us has. Carol: But helping Draco can be interpreted in two different ways, and it's clear from the first two provisions and from Snape's subsequent actions (which inclued putting Draco's two cronies in detention) that he's not trying to help him kill Dumbledore or get DEs into Hogwarts. He doesn't even know about the Vanishing Cabinet plan, and he discourages Draco from using "amateurish" methods like cursed necklaces that can kill or injure innocent people (or, more to the point from Draco's perspective, get him caught). The only life that's endangered when Snape swears to protect and watch over Draco is his own. As for the third provision, to "do the deed" if Draco can't, that wasn't in the original bargain. Narcissa through it in after Snape was quite literally bound to her by ropes of fire. He had to decide what to do in that moment. What we don't know is why he chose to accept that provision. Would an evil Snape have risked his own life to save Draco from committing murder or being murdered? I don't think so. An evil Snape would have refused to take the vow in the first place because the Dark Lord wanted Draco to do the job or die. > Carol earlier: > > It's only the third provision, which he clearly didn't anticipate given the twitch, that presents a problem. > Eggplant: > At one stroke that literary device would turn a brilliant enigma, one of the most interesting characters in the books, into a laughing stock. Only a jackass would vow to do things when he didn't even know what he was vowing to do. Carol: I don't think so. I think that Snape is still a brilliant enigma or you and I wouldn't be discussing him and trying to figure him out. I think that the twitch means that he feared what was coming, that he knew he'd be binding himself to something he didn't want to do, but either he could not escape at that point or he chose to take the risk. After all, what were the chances that he'd confront a weakened Dumbledore on the tower or that Draco could get the DEs into Hogwarts? He's not agreeing to murder Dumbledore flat out at the first opportunity. He's agreeing to do it if it appears that Draco can't. And if Draco and Dumbledore can be kept apart and the DEs can be kept out of Hogwarts, the confrontation won't occur and the vow won't be triggered. It was a calculated risk, and Snape lost. > Carol earlier: > > the UV in itself does not prove that he's not Dumbledore's man. > Eggplant" > I think it does prove it, unless someone (like JKR) can come up with a sensible reason a good Snape would make that crazy vow. I'm not saying such a reason can't exist, maybe we'll learn of it on July 21, but I haven't heard it yet. Carol: I think you're confusing proof with evidence. If a point has been proven, for example that Fake!Moody was Barty Crouch Jr., there's no point arguing because the evidence is conclusive. Only points that have not yet been proven can be argued. You're not convinced that he could have taken the vow for legitimate reasons, and that's fine. But your skepticism is not proof that you're correct. It only means that you don't find my arguments convincing. And the very fact that you concede the possibility that JKR can come up with a reason you consider sensible shows that the vow does not in itself prove that Snape is not Dumbledore's man. Suppose that he took the first two provisions in good faith, risking his own life to save Draco from committing murder or being murdered. And suppose that he either had no way out of the third provision because he was trapped by the first two and/or to refuse would be to give away his true loyalties and make him useless to Dumbledore as a spy. Suppose that he did indeed tell Dumbledore and that they worked together to prevent the vow from being triggered with the combined motive of protecting Draco at all costs. And suppose that Dumbledore said to Snape as he said to Harry that, if it came to a choice between Snape's life and Dumbledore's, Snape must choose to save his own. Only Snape can get close enough to Voldemort to subvert him from the inside. Only Snape could save Draco from being killed by the DEs or Voldemort. And, as it happened, only Snape could save Harry and get the DEs out of Hogwarts. I think that Snape didn't want to make the vow and he didn't want to kill Dumbledore, but in both cases, he did what Dumbledore would want him to do. What is right and what is easy and not as clearly distinguishable in this case as they usually are, but I think that JKR can indeed make it clear that Snape in both cases did what was right rather than what was easy. If Snape was indeed evil, why didn't he mock Dumbledore and call him a "stupid old man," as Draco did? Why did he stop the DE from Crucioing Harry? Why did he bother to send DD's body over the battlements? Why not just let Fenrir Greyback savage it, and let the DEs run rampant through Hogwarts? Carol earlier: > > We're seeing the look of hatred and revulsion from Harry's pov > Eggplant: > No, the book said it looked like Snape was full of hate not that Harry thought he did. Carol: The book is written from Harry's point of view. *He* sees revulsion and hatred on Snape's face, but he doesn't see what's in Snape's mind. The parallel with what Harry feels in the cave is surely deliberate. The wording is too similar to be accidental. Note that the third-person-limited-omniscient narrator also says that Snape is going kill Harry or Crucio him into insanity, and it isn't even Snape who's casting the Crucio. Instead, he stops it. And, of course, Harry neither dies nor becomes insane. I can link you to some of my unreliable narrator posts if you like. But let's just say that just because the narrator says something doesn't make it true. If you need additional examples, I can cite them, starting with Harry's parents being killed in a car accident. Carol earlier: > > If someone *must* kill Dumbledore, and if it's the only way to save Draco's life, better Snape than Draco. > Eggplant: > I hope JKR doesn't pursue this, trading Dumbledore's life for slime > ball Draco seems like a poor idea and a very poor plot element. > Carol: Well, I'd rather that she hadn't brought in the Unbreakable Vow and had Snape kill Dumbledore on the tower because I hate what it's done to Snape. (Either I'm wrong and he's evil or he's suffering unendurable mental anguish and traded the reluctant trust of his fellow Order members for the hatred of the whole WW and terrible danger.) I'd much rather that Dumbledore had died from the poison or even that Draco had succeeded in killing him. when I said "better Snape than Draco," I was expressing what I believe to be JKR's and Dumbledore's view, not my own. But poor idea and poor plot element? I disagree, it's a compelling and tragic twist, closely tied in with Dumbledore's mercy on the tower. I only hope that the consequences for Snape aren't as tragic as they were for Dumbledore. But I'm afraid that you and I have very different hopes and expectations and very different ideas about what constitutes a poor idea or a poor plot element. Think how much more complex the plot will be if Snape is good and Harry has to find that out and forgive him and even work with him than if Snape is evil and we already know all there is to know--nothing left but a final confrontation between Snape and Harry and a waste of a complex and fascinating character, a "gift of a character," in JKR's own words. Carol, who doesn't think that anything so simple as Snape dying to save Harry's life can possibly resolve the enigma that is Severus Snape From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 23:37:45 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 23:37:45 -0000 Subject: Harry's "friend," the HBP (Was: Freud and JKR / Id vs. Superego ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165368 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > I think the Prince started out as basically a good kid. He had a > > slightly dark sense of humor (like Harry), but wasn't seething > > with anger. But that changed, and I think Harry, going through > > similar emotions (it's interesting to track his evolving view > > of Snape through the books), easily follows the Prince's slide. > > > >>Carol: > Well, yes and no. I don't see any "slide." The hexes and spells > other than Sectumsempra are no worse than the hexes that the > students routinely throw at each other. > Betsy Hp: Oh, you're correct of course. There's nothing specifically within the Prince's book to suggest it was more a slide than a fall (at least from what we've seen). I was going more by what I've picked up regarding Snape's character and from the little glimpses we've gotten here and there of his past. Though again, there's nothing to definitively say "slide" or "fall". It's more my personal interpertation. Regardless, the Prince reached a dark place that Harry responded to. So rather than providing a different way to go, the book sort of echoed Harry's feelings back to him. > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > I really got the sense that this wasn't just a neat instruction > > book Harry stumbled across, this was someone who Harry was able > > to personally relate to. Which is why he was so painfully eager > > for the Prince to actually be his father. > >>Carol: > And yet there's nothing in the book, so far as we know, except > Potions hints and notes for spells. I like the fact that he > considered the Prince his friend and teacher, and the irony that > the friend and teacher was Snape, but what is the basis for that > connection? > > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > There was enough there for Harry to personally identify with the > > Prince. The book was not just an instruction manual. > >>Carol: > Canon, please? We don't have *anything* except the Bezoar line, > potions hints, and spells being worked out in the margins, and the > "notation "for enemies." > Betsy Hp: There's nothing specific as to what's *written* in the Prince's book that connects to Harry so. But JKR *does* make clear, IMO, that such a connection is made. First she establishes that the books is *covered* with notes: "Harry wondered vaguely who the Half-Blood Prince had been. Although the amount of homework they'd been given prevented him from reading the whole of his copy of Advanced Potion-Making, he had skimmed through it sufficiently to see that there was barely a page on which the Prince had not made additional notes..." [HBP scholastic p.194-5] So there's enough there that we as readers know we're not going to see everything. But we also know that there's enough there for Harry to get an idea of this person's personality (sense of humor, what he sees as important, way of thinking, etc.). Then she shows how much Harry enjoys reading those notes: "Harry woke early on the morning of the trip, which was proving stormy, and whiled away the time until breakfast by reading his copy of Advanced Potion-Making. He did not usually lie in bed reading his textbooks; that sort of behavior, as Ron rightly said, was indecent in anybody except Hermione, who was simply weird that way. Harry felt, however, that the Half-Blood Prince's copy of Advanced Potion- Making hardly qualified as a textbook. [ibid p.237-238] Yes, Harry is very interested in the "imaginative little jinxes and hexes" contained therein, but JKR is also telling us that Harry spends a great deal of time pouring over the Prince's book. Only some of the spells get used, but he's enjoying the process because he's enjoying the author. And finally, JKR reveals that Harry secretly hopes the Prince is his father: "Harry, meanwhile, felt a rush of excitement: This last mention of his father had reminded him that there was something he had been looking forward to asking Lupin. "Have you ever heard of someone called the Half-Blood Prince?" [...] "He tried to sound casual, as though this was a throwaway comment of no real importance, but he was not sure he had achieved the right affect; Lupin's smile was a little too understanding. [...] "James was a pureblood, Harry, and I promise you, he never asked us to call him 'Prince'." "Abandoning pretense, Harry said, "And it wasn't Sirius? Or you?" [ibid p. 335-336] Harry sees something in the notes he's spent so much time pouring over that he's "excited" about learning that this is something of his father's, or Sirius's, or even Lupin's. That, to me, suggests that Harry's made an emotional connection of some sort. Of course, from what we've seen, young Snape did not treat this book as a personal diary. We don't have any pining over girls or agnst over family issues or anything of that sort. But we do know that his personality is still in there; we've been allowed to see a bit of it. Harry, with so many written notes to pour over as JKR makes clear, would have experienced even more of it. [FYI, I pulled this next bit out of the above, because I think it's a slightly different topic.] > >>Carol: > > (He can tell that the Prince is a boy, probably because more boys > > than girls are interested in hexes... > >>Betsy Hp: > > I seriously doubt Harry's understanding that the Prince was a boy > > was based on such reasoning. He does know Ginny after all. > >>Carol: > I forgot about Ginny. But she's not typical. > > And if that's not the reason Harry thought (knew) the HBP was a > boy, what do you think it could have been? The Bezoar crack is the > only hint of boyish humor in the book. And, of course, there's the > fact that the HBP called himself the Half-Blood *Prince.* Betsy Hp: Frankly, I don't think JKR would use a "girls don't throw hexes" reasoning to suggest the Prince is a boy, nor would she let Harry use same. And yes, Harry himself, suggests that "Prince" is more of a boy's name. But honestly, I think it really does come down to the tenor of the notes. I think they strike Harry as more "boy-like", which I think translates to "more like me". Not in content (Harry not being a potions man) but in style. Just another way for JKR to show the connection Harry is making with this character. Betsy Hp From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Feb 23 23:42:47 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 23:42:47 -0000 Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165369 --- "va32h" wrote: > > > colebiancardi: > > In my firm belief, which could change after 7/21, > > if DD hid Regulus (and maybe his father), it was > > done in such a way that it made Regulus seem dead > > to the rest of the world. Remember what DD told > >Draco - they cannot kill you if you are already dead. > > va32h here: > > I was also of the mind that Dumbledore hid Regulus. > But the one thing that throws a wrench into that idea > (for me) is the trip to the cave for the locket > horcrux. > > If Regulus took the horcrux, and went to Dumbledore > to help him hide from Voldemort, why doesn't > Dumbledore already know that the locket is a fake? ... > > va32h > bboyminn: A couple of 'for what it's worth' points. There ARE other Blacks alive right now. Draco is a Black, his mother is a Black (by birth), Bellatrix is a Black, Tonks and Tonks Mother are Blacks. They are just not 'Direct Line' Blacks. If fact the oldest Black cousin (Bella) was the one who stood to inherit if Harry refused or was somehow unable to officially inherit. Sirius Black is in the direct line of decendancy for that unique branch of the Black Family, and as such everything belong to him. He apparently found a way to insure the the legacy and estate of Sirius's family was passed to Harry. If there were other legitimate Black heirs like Regulus or their Father, that would seem to invalidate Harry receiving the estate, which in turn means Keacher would have no allegiance to Harry at all. Still, it is hard to believe that those statements by Dumbledore regarding protection by making people seem dead are meaningless. That particular paragraph has been fiddled with by the editors. Only certain earlier version have Dumbledore making that offer to Draco in detail. If I understand correctly, later editions have Dumbledore's statements softened and have those statements about being able to make people appear dead are missing. One can only conclude that it was very significant but they decided it gave too much away, or they decided it was insignificant and thought it lead people on. STILL, I'm in the camp that it is significant, just not the way we are speculating. I think Regulus and his father are dead, otherwise the whole inheritance thing would be screwed up. I think either Regulus returned home before he died, and left the Locket there, or after he died, his personal affects were turned over to his family, and that is how the Locket got to Grimmauld Place. I don't think Dumbledore was involved. Again, I think this offer by Dumbledore is significant, just not in the way that is usually speculated. As to VA32's comments, I have to agree. Trying to involve Dumbledore after the Locket was stolen raise too many unsolvable problems. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Feb 24 00:11:57 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 00:11:57 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165370 > "justcarol67" wrote: > > > Snape's AK on the tower is an anomaly, > > different in many respects from the > > other AKs we've seen. Eggplant: > But how many AK's have we SEEN before? I would say approximately none; > we've only seen the after effects. Pippin: We saw the one that killed the spider, the one that killed the fox, and the one that was intercepted by the golden statue of the wizard at the MOM, plus several more apparent killing curses that were fired nonverbally at Dumbledore during that battle. As far as I can tell, the rushing sound is noted only when the curse kills, but not always -- there's no rushing sound when the fox dies, just a yelp. In any case, if you argue that none of us is expert enought to say positively we didn't witness an AK, the reverse is also true: we also can't say positively that it was. Pippin From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Sat Feb 24 01:47:51 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 01:47:51 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165371 I firmly believe that Snape did indeed kill Dumbledore, just as DD wanted him to to spare Draco the stain of murder and save Snape's life. Maybe he considers Snape more valuable than himself, just as he told Harry he was more valuable. As for why Snape took the vow in the first place, well he was rather backed into the corner wasn't he? I wonder - is it possible he took the vow meaning to break it even though it would cost him his life? Remember the fragment of conversation overheard by Hagrid: "Well - I jus' heard Snape sayin' Dumbledore took too much fer granted an' maybe he - Snape - didn't wan' to do it anymore." Do what? Protect Draco at the cost of Dumbledore? Go on playing this deadly double game? Is death beginning to look like a good, like the only way out of the nightmare his life's become? (not that it was apparently ever that great!) From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Feb 24 01:49:39 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 01:49:39 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165372 Pippin: If Dumbledore hit the ground hard enough to disarrange his limbs, bounce the locket out of his pocket and open it, why are his glasses not even broken? (cf Harry's fall in PoA). Carol: > > What are the implications for Harry and Snape if it was the poison, > not an AK, that killed Dumbledore? > Pippin: I think the possibilities for Harry's character development are much richer if that is the case. After all, what do we want him to do? Of course I want him to finish some bad guys, but I also want him to recognize and subdue the prejudice he's developed against Snape and Slytherins in general. I want him to learn to acknowledge guilt without being crushed by it or pushing it off onto someone else. I want him to be able to recognize that while saving people from death is a good thing, it may not be the most important thing (because there are worse things than death), and the failure to save someone is not necessarily a complete failure. Of course he might accomplish all this without having to realize that the poison killed Dumbledore, but what would make him see the need? As for Snape, I think it would make clear that Snape really has changed profoundly from the youth who practiced killing flies, invented sectumsempra and joined the Death Eaters. I'd like to think that what Hagrid claimed is true in a literal sense and Snape *couldn't* have killed Dumbledore, because like Dumbledore there are powers that nobility prevented him from using. Pippin From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sat Feb 24 03:19:05 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 03:19:05 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165373 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > > > > > You're still missing the main point, which is that *Harry is > receiving credit for the HBP's research and creativity.* > > That's a fair statement, but, isn't it also a fair statement that in this year of Harry's life whether he is comprimising the integrity of his academic record is hardly the epitome of importance. Consider the end of his fifth year, he was possessed by Voldemort, he tasted death, and he lost one of his dearest loved ones all in one day... and then afterwards he is sat down by his mentor and informed that any day now.. could be tomorrow.. definitely very soon.. you will fight Voldemort to the death. You'll die or you'll be a murderer.. but either way the wizard world is counting on you to win Harry.. And after all of that, Harry is supposed to care much and feel guilty if he is getting through potions class without having to work hard, while learning powerful spells and techniques from the mysterious book? How can Harry be choosing easy over right, IMO easy would be to care about the rigmarole of academic honesty, easy would be to microcosm his energy into a square of reality significant only to him and his reputation as a student. Whats easy about accepting at the age of sixteen that the weight of the world rests on you getting one moment in your life perfect even if its your last, whats easy about knowing that you are marching towards an early death where what you achieve as a sixteen year old in your academic career is just so profoundly academic as to feel like a complete waste of time? JMHO. Valky From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 24 02:51:35 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 02:51:35 -0000 Subject: Killing Snape (was Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165374 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > Betsy Hp: > I'm hopeful that it wasn't a real AK for one reason and one reason > only: I want Snape to live. If Snape really *did* actively kill > Dumbledore (rather than merely removing the life-support if you will) > than I suspect he's going to die for moral reasons. As a murderer, > JKR will have to kill him off, no matter the reason for the murder. > > Sort of like how in a gothic story, if the ingenue is actually raped > by the villain she dies. The situation with Boromir in LOTR, much discussed in other threads, is perhaps more to the point. That is that offering up one's life is the final act of penance. The objection, often voiced by Pippin I believe, is that such a storyline would not leave us with an example of someone who reforms, does penance for their actions, and is then reintegrated into the world to a greater or lesser degree. That is true, and would indicate a certain moral harshness. Then again, moral harshness seems to be one of the things many people criticize JKR for. Marietta and her plight comes to mind, as does the twins treatment of Dudley, DD's attitude at the Dursleys, etc. Therefore such a theme would be keeping with some people's view of JKR and the Potter saga. The other criticism is that killing Snapey-poo would be, as Carol observes, unoriginal and uninventive writing. But once again, such standard developments, unoriginal and uninventive or not, often occur at key points in the saga. JKR herself says (paraphrase) that DD died because "the old wizard with the beard always dies in these kinds of stories," and that Sirius died because "the hero has to lose his support in these kinds of stories." Also, as Nora has said, I give you the example of about a million Harry/Hermione shippers, who proclaimed loudly that JKR would NEVER pair up Harry with Ron's little sister and NEVER go with the dreaded OBHWF, because such developments would be so unoriginal, formulaic, and uninspired. So, to this point we have plentiful precedent for moral harshness and uninventive and standard plot developments. What would be the narrative purpose? To close off Snape's story, I suppose. After all, what place would he have in a world where all the developments that define him, all the questions that frame his story, are resolved? He would be a being out of his time, a relic from a past now thankfully put to rest. What would be the moral purpose? I guess to illustrate redemption and its price. Redemption, perhaps, is a moral necessity, but nothing about its necessity makes it cheap. It can be extraordinarily expensive, and for some degrees of moral turpitude, maybe, only available for the ultimate sacrifice. Thus the example of Boromir, whose redemption could only purchased at the cost of his life. Not an uncontroversial idea, I know. There are plenty of other ways to look at redemption. For instance you could argue, as certain understandings of Catholic penitential doctrine would have it, that redemption is a matter of forgiveness, which requires no price other than confession and contrition. Well, we haven't seen either of those from Snapey-poo either, although DD claims to have done so. And certainly Snapey-poo has plenty to pay for since the death of the Potters (i.e, the whole problem with his abuse of children), and even DD has not claimed to see contrition and penance for that. But all of this may miss the point. God may forgive any sin for the price of sincere contrition (under one set of theories, not universally held), but the world and human society does not. Boromir could only be a worldy hero by purchasing redemption at the cost of his life -- and that in the hands of a good Catholic like Tolkien. If you believe in a DDM!Snape, or a Grey!Snape, then Snapey-poo is under the same burden and owes the same price. And if he's evil, then he still owes the price, albeit as a matter of punishment and not penance. Lupinlore, who looks forward to getting the whole dratted mess resolved, although it may well end in the sound of a wood chipper From belviso at attglobal.net Sat Feb 24 03:38:32 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:38:32 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On lying and cheating References: Message-ID: <011101c757c5$435b76f0$af7e400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165375 Valky: > How can Harry be choosing easy over right, IMO easy would be to care > about the rigmarole of academic honesty, easy would be to microcosm > his energy into a square of reality significant only to him and his > reputation as a student. Magpie: Harry pretty much is doing that. He's dealing with his classes like any other student, putting in the effort of lying about his book to give himself a reputation he doesn't need and get an easier time in class. It's not a sacrifice he's making as The Chosen One. Is Harry really supposed to assume he's above such petty things as the kinds of behavior expected from students because he's got Voldemort after him--something he didn't choose either, he's stuck with? Does that lessen his stature to consider himself just another student at school? How does not lying about his interest and skill at Potions take away from that role? Valky: Whats easy about accepting at the age of > sixteen that the weight of the world rests on you getting one moment > in your life perfect even if its your last, whats easy about knowing > that you are marching towards an early death where what you achieve as > a sixteen year old in your academic career is just so profoundly > academic as to feel like a complete waste of time? Magpie: So maybe he should quite school! Lots of teenagers do, when they think academics is a waste of time. I just don't understand this attitude at all--what does Harry's bad situation in life have to do with him giving himself unfair advantages in school? He's approaching his sixth year like any other student and getting the same enjoyment out of his repuation as any other student would. It seems like you're trying to argue that since Harry has been forced into a life that isn't easy, easy-versus-right no longer applies to him. -m From kking0731 at gmail.com Sat Feb 24 03:40:02 2007 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 03:40:02 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: <307305.23123.qm@web35006.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165376 deborah snipped: Anyone else think that lake was filled with "Draught of living death," the first potion Snape introduced in Harry's first potions' class? Could this have played a role in the events that followed? If Dumbledore's death were being "stoppered" would draught of living death have had less effect on him? Clearly, Dumbledore is already borrowing time somehow. Snow: You may have hit the nail directly on the head deborah! I had always thought that the draught of living death was a potion to put a stopper in death...something you take to make you appear dead but you are still alive (like a Hamlet's Romeo and Juliet). The way I now can perceive this potion, from what you have said, is that it keeps the dead alive. In other words, the inferius in the cave are kept alive by a potion, the draught of living death. They are kept alive even though they are quite dead. The potion isn't meant to keep people from dying, it is meant to keep those who are dead alive...in other words, stop death. The Inferi are the living dead! Dumbledore should have been dead from drinking the poison but Voldemort wanted to know who could have broken his defenses of the cave, so being made thirsty enough to drink from the lake not only brought the inferius to life but kept Dumbledore alive as well, but only for a time. The inferius live in the liquid so they can never escape death. Snow From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sat Feb 24 04:14:06 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 04:14:06 -0000 Subject: Killing Snape (was Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165377 Lupinlore: > The situation with Boromir in LOTR, much discussed in other threads, is perhaps more to the point. That is that offering up one's life is the final act of penance. The objection, often voiced by Pippin I believe, is that such a storyline would not leave us with an example of someone who reforms, does penance for their actions, and is then reintegrated into the world to a greater or lesser degree. That is true, and would indicate a certain moral harshness. The other criticism is that killing Snape would be, as Carol observes, unoriginal and uninventive writing. But once again, such standard developments, unoriginal and uninventive or not, often occur at key points in the saga. *(snip)* So, to this point we have plentiful precedent for moral harshness and uninventive and standard plot developments. Ceridwen: I'm having a hard time snipping your post. You raise some interesting issues. These days there are plenty of genre-bending stories out there, so the morally un-harsh solution would be just as hackneyed as the morally harsh solution. It's just as possible that, if JKR writes Snape as living beyond the end of DH, we'll see CareBears!Snape and group hugs all around. With each issue she faces in the story, she has at least two ways to go, and a possible third by dividing the results of genre-bending and a traditional telling. IF Snape lives, and of course this is a very big IF, I would want him to remain true to character, given any natural changes that would occur to a combatant in wartime. I'm taking a class about Fiction right now in school. The teacher has talked about Archetypes, and I think that what you, Carol and Pippin are saying is there is a certain storyline that seems to go with the Snape or Boromir characters that resonate in the unconscious. Rather than being 'uninventive and unorigional', then, this storyline would be expected and, on some level, satisfying for the majority of readers. Even if the readers like the character (I liked Boromir very much, both book and movie, but he was cuter in the movie), the usual ending, death, would be satisfying on some level. But not everyone agrees with the Collective Unconscious and stories. I would thoroughly enjoy an inventive and original ending, with Snape living and finally having a life. Yes, I know he made his bed, but sometimes we do get to sweep out the cracker crumbs before we have to lie in them. *g* Lupinlore: > What would be the narrative purpose? To close off Snape's story, I suppose. After all, what place would he have in a world where all the developments that define him, all the questions that frame his story, are resolved? He would be a being out of his time, a relic from a past now thankfully put to rest. Ceridwen: And, this sort of ending would go along with the gradual decimation of the Marauders, also of Snape's time. But, Snape was not part of the Marauders, unless you consider him to be a part by being seperate but engaged by them. Do all of the developments that define Snape live in the past? He is still a powerful wizard; he has been shown to be handy with an apparently complex healing spell; he is young enough, especially in the WW, to move on and create another life for himself. Simply leaving would be as radical a change. In my opinion, of course. Lupinlore: > *(snip)*There are plenty of other ways to look at redemption. For instance you could argue, as certain understandings of Catholic penitential doctrine would have it, that redemption is a matter of forgiveness, which requires no price other than confession and contrition. Well, we haven't seen either of those from Snape either, although DD claims to have done so. Ceridwen: In the doctrine of confession, only the priest, not the public, hear the confession. If Dumbledore 'heard Snape's confession', then it isn't up to Harry to hear it, or by extension the reader. That may change in DH. In fact, if that is the way it is, then I think Harry and the reader will get to see that moment, or somehow be informed of it, since this is Harry's story. If we're supposed to learn something from Snape's story, then we'll see inside the confessional. Lupinlore: > But all of this may miss the point. God may forgive any sin for the price of sincere contrition (under one set of theories, not universally held), but the world and human society does not. Boromir could only be a worldy hero by purchasing redemption at the cost of his life -- and that in the hands of a good Catholic like Tolkien. If you believe in a DDM!Snape, or a Grey!Snape, then Snape is under the same burden and owes the same price. And if he's evil, then he still owes the price, albeit as a matter of punishment and not penance. Ceridwen: I was going to go an entirely different direction, but I got to thinking about famous Guys Who Died. The most obvious to me is Judas Iscariot. He betrayed his lord, and suffered the ultimate punishment for it. In fact, he suffered the ignomy of taking his own life, from remorse. I suppose that if someone is seeing ESE!Snape, then this could very well be the outcome. In fact, I think this has been suggested by a few posters already: the last-minute saving of Harry or someone in the Order, or suddenly breaking Voldy's wand, and dying for his trouble. But if Snape is DDM! all along, then how would this sort of archetype fit? The main conflict overall is the war with Voldemort and if Snape is on Dumbledore's side from before the series begins, then why would he have to be redeemed or suffer from the archetypal effects of extreme remorse? Boromir suffered his crisis on-page, though he came to the page with a dream already in place which seemed to be answered by the Ring. IF Snape is and has been DDM! since before the Potters died, then should the usual expectations for the redeemed or remorseful apply to him? Ceridwen, enjoying the discussion. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sat Feb 24 05:35:56 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 05:35:56 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: <011101c757c5$435b76f0$af7e400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165378 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > Valky: > > How can Harry be choosing easy over right, IMO easy would be to care > > about the rigmarole of academic honesty, easy would be to microcosm > > his energy into a square of reality significant only to him and his > > reputation as a student. > > Magpie: > Harry pretty much is doing that. He's dealing with his classes like any > other student, putting in the effort of lying about his book to give himself > a reputation he doesn't need and get an easier time in class. Valky now: I agree exactly, Magpie, he's doing it to get an easier time in class. Magpie: It's not a > sacrifice he's making as The Chosen One. I disagree with that, though. I say he wants an easier time in class because he's got enough going on that is inevitably more pressing and alarming to his senses. IIRC he even does contemplate once or twice during HBP the 'normal' life that he doesn't have. And I'm sure that normal life in his mind would include thinking about the Potions text as an unfair advantage in school rather than a potential tool that could arm him and prepare him in his future battle against Voldemort and the DE's. The fact is he doesn't feel he has the luxury of looking at the potions text that way, all he feels he can, or should, focus upon, is becoming a better wand wielding warrior, for the sake of the wizard world and the people he loves. Pleasing Slughorn in class would surely seem like a petty and unimportant goal, while the option of having the onus to do that off your back while you concentrate on other things that you feel are vital.. wouldn't that seem the right path ? > How does not lying about his interest and skill > at Potions take away from that role? Valky: In a nutshell, it saves timeyou would otherwise spend worrying about a student status that won't save you from Voldemort. > > Valky: > Whats easy about accepting at the age of > > sixteen that the weight of the world rests on you getting one moment > > in your life perfect even if its your last, whats easy about knowing > > that you are marching towards an early death where what you achieve as > > a sixteen year old in your academic career is just so profoundly > > academic as to feel like a complete waste of time? > > Magpie: > So maybe he should quite school! Lots of teenagers do, when they think > academics is a waste of time. And go where? To do what? The fact is Hogwarts was central to everything he knew he needed to know about his destiny and his fight with Voldemort, because Dumbledore is there. The moment DD was buried Harry did quit school. Telling, No? > It seems like you're trying to argue that since Harry > has been forced into a life that isn't easy, easy-versus-right no > longer applies to him. Not at all. Like I said, what he was choosing wasn't what was easy. It was hard for Harry to not be like other students. I'm not saying it was necessarily right that he did use the potions notes secretly, or that he made no mistake in his judgement. Harry blunders a lot of times in the series, and this is probably one of them. What I am saying is that there is no way he could have thought for a second that getting good marks would make his life ultimately easier in the way Carol was implying. Not with the constant threat of a final 'to the death' showdown with Voldemort looming close on the horizon. There is no way to believe getting good grades no matter how will make that easier. JMHO, as usual. xxoo Valky From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Feb 24 07:50:17 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 07:50:17 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: <011101c757c5$435b76f0$af7e400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165379 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: Valky: > > Whats easy about accepting at the age of > > sixteen that the weight of the world rests on you getting one moment > > in your life perfect even if its your last, whats easy about knowing > > that you are marching towards an early death where what you achieve as > > a sixteen year old in your academic career is just so profoundly > > academic as to feel like a complete waste of time? > > Magpie: > So maybe he should quit school! Lots of teenagers do, when they think > academics is a waste of time. I just don't understand this attitude at > all--what does Harry's bad situation in life have to do with him giving > himself unfair advantages in school? He's approaching his sixth year like > any other student and getting the same enjoyment out of his repuation as any > other student would. It seems like you're trying to argue that since Harry > has been forced into a life that isn't easy, easy-versus-right no longer > applies to him. Geoff: Picking up along the lines of Valky's reply, which is the lesser of two evils? Coping with an academic situation which, in the short term, seems pointless but relatively "comfortable" or going back to the neglect and verbal abuse of Privet Drive? Would there, hypothetically, be other alternatives? From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Feb 24 08:17:05 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 08:17:05 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165380 --- "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol earlier: > > > > > > You're still missing the main point, which is > > > that *Harry is receiving credit for the HBP's > > > research and creativity.* > > > > Mike: > > I catch your point Carol . But I think many > > people are still debating whether Harry was cheating > > or not ..... > > > Instead, your main point, which I do agree with, is > > that Harry's taken credit for the "Prince's" research > > smacks of plageristic oppurtunism. ... > > Carol: > I suppose our quibble is over the term cheating. As a > former teacher who had to deal with,..., students > copying essays off the Internet which they claimed > as their own, I do consider taking credit for other > people's ideas cheating, ... How "plagiaristic > opportunism" could be anything other than cheating is > beyond my comprehension. ... bboyminn: This is one of those rare times when Carol and I disagree, though I have been persuaded to her side but only to a very small degree. First and foremost, Harry isn't taking credit any more than any other students are. They are ALL using someone else's innovation, someone else's research, someone else's genius, because every student in class is using someone else's recipe or formula, and that is /exactly/ what they are suppose to be doing. It's just that Harry is getting his information from a different 'someone else'. Now earlier in this discussion someone mentioned a point that was a 'head slapper' 'now I get it' moment for me. They mentioned the potion where Slughorn admires Harry for having had the insight to put a sprig of Peppermint into his potion. Harry readily accepts that credit with no indication he got the idea from someone else. While I don't think using the book in general was cheating for reason I have already given. I can see how this one event would be considered unethical by many people. However, unethical as the politically correct amoung us might see it, I see it as a very 'kid' thing to do. In that sense, it very much stays in character for Harry. I think nearly every kid in real life would have done the same thing. They would have gladly accepted the 'sin of ommission' as being OK. Harry got the correct result, and that is the truest test of APPLYING potions. Keep in mind that is what is being tested here, not the innovation of the recipe, but the ability to apply a known recipe. As I said, the other kids have a mediocre 'chocolate cake' recipe and they tend to produce /less than/ mediocre 'chocolate cake'. Harry has a different, far more fussy and complicated recipe, and he applies it very well. And the most important part is the 'applies it very well' part. That indicates that Harry does indeed have some aptitude for potions. I will touch on this more later. > Mike: > > And I think this stems from all the non-potion spells > > that Harry wants to explore. Harry does not want to > > lose that oppurtunity and, on a fundamental level, I > > don't believe it is Harry's place to point out to > > Slughorn that he (Sluggy) assigned an inferior book > > for his NEWT students. ...but, that does not > > exonerate Harry from claiming credit by proxy of all > > the Prince's work. > > > > It's this two pronged part of the problem that lies > > at the base of this debate. ... It's a closer call > > for those of us that don't think using the book is > > cheating. > > Carol responds: > Oho! It's not *just* reluctance to give up the friend > who's "helping" him attain an unearned reputation for > brilliance in Potions. It's a reluctance to give up the > source of those clever hexes and charms. > That makes it all right, then. > > Carol, bboyminn: If what people are referring to is, as illustrated by, Harry not giving credit for the 'sprig of peppermint', then, in that limited context, I agree. I would have felt Harry deflected the situation better if he had said something like 'oh, just something I read about somewhere'. Still slightly unethical, but it is a lie told with the truth; which I've always felt was the best kind of lie. Not ethically best; just the safest most effective. Still though, it seems the perfect 'kid' thing to do, and I would have expected no more from any other kid. I think many people forget just how separated kids are from the adult world. In a sense, kids live in their own parallel universe where the 'rules of the playground' are very different from the rules adults live by. In a broad and general sense, adults are the enemy. Any encounter of any kind with an adult has a high potential for the kid ending up in trouble, at least from the kids point of view. So, kids avoid adults. We see Harry and the gang following this same pattern thoughout the books. Harry doesn't go to McGonagall because McGonagall is the bringer of shouting, trouble, and punishment. So from the 'holier than thou' (for lack of a better way of expressing it) view of us clear-thinking adults, what Harry does is wrong. But I seriously doubt that there are many kids out there would wouldn't have pressed their advantage in the same way if given a chance. Though, I have to say I think Harry's 'moral error' is much much smaller than copying off the Internet or similar breaches of classroom ethics. Again, in my mind it is not so much a matter of 'if', but more a matter of 'degrees', and for the record I see a low degree of wrong doing. Now off on a new subject. As I read this thread and other similar threads and I saw people discussing Harry's relationship with the HBP Book. I found myself pondering why Harry is so attached to this book and the information contained therein? Then I considered the other sources of the same information that are available to Harry. Harry hates Snape with a passion. Those two have been at each others throats since book 1. Harry is going to have an adverse reaction to anything that Snape says, even if it is as innocuous as 'pass the butter'. That makes it impossible for Harry to function in Snape's Potions Class. The tension between them is so great it interfers with everything. Consequently, with Snape as a teacher, Harry sucks at Potions. While Harry certainly sees Slughorn as far more benevolent than Snape, he none the less sees Slughorn for what he is, and he is not pleased. Slughorn wants him for a trophy, Slughorn sucks up to him because Harry is famous, and that is exactly the type of person Harry has made a constant effort to avoid. So, any thing that Slughorn says or does is suspect. He is very Slytherin-ish, trying to make money off of Hagrid's tragedy, etc.... So, Harry doesn't value Slughorn much as a person or a teacher. Now the Half-Blood Prince, and his writings in the Potions Books are neutral. The book has not personality to irritate Harry. The book is non-judgemental, non-criticizing, and patient. It is no wonder Harry indentifies with it. He finally has a source of knowledge in spells and potions, that unlike the adults, can't get him into trouble. That is, if he is caught, it will get him into trouble, but it is not the book that actually gets him into trouble, it is the other-universe adults who discover the book that will cause all the problems. It is easy to see why Harry relates to the book and doesn't want to give it up. In the areas he most needs help, the book is helping him, and is doing it in a non-threatening way. At least a way that would be preceived as non-threatening to a school boy. The Irony of course is that the HBP is really Snape, the one person that Harry absolutely can NOT get along with, is the one person that he most positively identifies with. Why? Because Snape is very judgemental, and Snape's book is not judgemental in the least. Just a few more thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 24 15:51:58 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 15:51:58 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165381 Pippin wrote: > > As for Snape, I think it would make clear that Snape really has > changed profoundly from the youth who practiced killing flies, > invented sectumsempra and joined the Death Eaters. Carol responds: This is just a small aside. I'm not sure that Teen!Snape is practicing killing flies in the sense of practicing killing people. There's no green flash, for one thing. He could simply be Stunning them. Or, since no light at all is mentioned (Stupefy give off a red light), maybe he's using a spell especially designed for flies. Surely wizards and witches kill flies just as Muggles do, and I doubt that they use a fly swatter. I wouldn't want flies in my room, either. My sense in that memory is that he's just bored, a teenage boy with nowhere to go and nothing to do. And BTW, I don't think, as some posters do, that the memory of the boy Severus on a bucking broom being watched by a laughing girl indicates that he's not good at flying. He does fine the one time we see him fly, as referee in a Quidditch game. If he were a bad flyer, he'd never have volunteered for that job. Brooms don't normally buck off their riders. Even the school brooms, which sense an inexperienced and timid rider, send Neville fifty feet into the air, where he falls off. The boy in the memory strikes me as determined, not timid, Snape through and through. I think the broom is hexed. If it weren't for the age difference, I'd think she was Bellatrix. Carol, thinking we shouldn't leap to conclusions from those minor memories and hoping we'll learn more about them From belviso at attglobal.net Sat Feb 24 16:11:08 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 11:11:08 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On lying and cheating References: Message-ID: <004501c7582e$65954610$2e8c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165383 > Magpie: > It's not a >> sacrifice he's making as The Chosen One. > Valky: > I disagree with that, though. I say he wants an easier time in class > because he's got enough going on that is inevitably more pressing and > alarming to his senses. IIRC he even does contemplate once or twice > during HBP the 'normal' life that he doesn't have. And I'm sure that > normal life in his mind would include thinking about the Potions text > as an unfair advantage in school rather than a potential tool that > could arm him and prepare him in his future battle against Voldemort > and the DE's. The fact is he doesn't feel he has the luxury of looking > at the potions text that way, all he feels he can, or should, focus > upon, is becoming a better wand wielding warrior, for the sake of the > wizard world and the people he loves. Pleasing Slughorn in class would > surely seem like a petty and unimportant goal, while the option of > having the onus to do that off your back while you concentrate on > other things that you feel are vital.. wouldn't that seem the right > path ? Magpie: I think I'm not getting what you're saying. Here it seems like you're saying that Harry's getting an undeserved reputation in Potions is somehow a sacrifice as the Chosen One, because by having his class taken care of he can concentrate on Voldemort. But I don't think Harry ever presents the situation to himself like that, or that it ever has that effect one way or the other. It's seems like if he was doing that his character would have taken a serious turn for the worse and started lying to himself in an unfortunate way. Valky:> > Not at all. > > Like I said, what he was choosing wasn't what was easy. It was hard > for Harry to not be like other students. I'm not saying it was > necessarily right that he did use the potions notes secretly, or that > he made no mistake in his judgement. Harry blunders a lot of times in > the series, and this is probably one of them. What I am saying is that > there is no way he could have thought for a second that getting good > marks would make his life ultimately easier in the way Carol was > implying. Not with the constant threat of a final 'to the death' > showdown with Voldemort looming close on the horizon. There is no way > to believe getting good grades no matter how will make that easier. Magpie: Maybe I'm not following your conversation with Carol, because I don't understand this. Are you saying that Harry couldn't have thought what he's doing at Potions would make his life easier because it wouldn't help him with Voldemort? So that he can't be said to be choosing easy? I honestly don't remember what Carol said, but I didn't think there was any question that Harry was making his life easier in terms of fighting Voldemort. I thought he was facing a very limited situation--a regular class in school--and in that situation he's blatantly choosing easy over right by giving himself a secret advantage over other kids. Just like if he were cheating at Quidditch he'd be doing what is easy over what is right to make that portion of his life better. I feel like my answer here might be completely off-base because I'm not really getting what you're saying, though. It sounds like you're saying Harry's difficulties in life put him above right and wrong, or turn everything he does into something right. Geoff: Picking up along the lines of Valky's reply, which is the lesser of two evils? Coping with an academic situation which, in the short term, seems pointless but relatively "comfortable" or going back to the neglect and verbal abuse of Privet Drive? Would there, hypothetically, be other alternatives? Magpie: Again, I feel like I'm still not following. What lesser of two evils does Harry have to cope with here? Potions class isn't a problem for him. Had the book not dropped into his lap he'd have been fine taking it as any other student. It seems like a straightforward example of right vs. easy to me for Harry to keep an unearned advantage to himself, and I'm not really following the arguments that it isn't because other areas of Harry's life are still hard. Steve: First and foremost, Harry isn't taking credit any more than any other students are. They are ALL using someone else's innovation, someone else's research, someone else's genius, because every student in class is using someone else's recipe or formula, and that is /exactly/ what they are suppose to be doing. It's just that Harry is getting his information from a different 'someone else'. Magpie: He is taking credit where it isn't due more than any other student is, because Slughorn is very specifically crediting him with things he knows he is not. The other students are doing exactly what Slughorn thinks they are doing: using the formula he has given them, following it, and getting a result. Slughorn thinks Harry is doing that, and through some sort of natural brilliance at Potions, coming out better than they are. Harry is not doing that and he knows it. He's using a better formula, and better instructions, and not bringing any instinct to it at all. That's where he's taking credit for something that is not true, and he knows this. How could he deny it to himself? Steve: However, unethical as the politically correct amoung us might see it, I see it as a very 'kid' thing to do. In that sense, it very much stays in character for Harry. I think nearly every kid in real life would have done the same thing. They would have gladly accepted the 'sin of ommission' as being OK. Magpie: Of course they might have--but that's a different issue. It's one thing to say "Harry is doing this just as lots--but not all--of kids would have and I'm not particularly bothered by it" and another to argue that Harry isn't doing that at all. It seems like you're often doing the latter at times. Steve: Keep in mind that is what is being tested here, not the innovation of the recipe, but the ability to apply a known recipe. As I said, the other kids have a mediocre 'chocolate cake' recipe and they tend to produce /less than/ mediocre 'chocolate cake'. Magpie: I still think you're trying to argue Harry into a talent that the book says he does not have and that he himself does not think he has. It makes no sense to me that Harry is supposed to have become, for no reason, suddenly better at Potions this year than other kids in his class who were previously better at it than he was. I agree that JKR's way of showing this is a bit dodgy, but I can't agree that this is about Harry's talent at anything to do with Potions rather than being a better liar. Here you see to even by trying to give Harry *even more* credit by claiming he's following a far more "fussy" recipe and so should get points for being able to follow it! Steve: That indicates that Harry does indeed have some aptitude for potions. I will touch on this more later. Magpie: Sure he has aptitude for Potions. If he didn't he wouldn't be in NEWT level or getting Exceeds Expectations on his OWL. He does not have the aptitude in Potions that he is being praised for in HBP. Steve: Still though, it seems the perfect 'kid' thing to do, and I would have expected no more from any other kid.I think many people forget just how separated kids are from the adult world. In a sense, kids live in their own parallel universe where the 'rules of the playground' are very different from the rules adults live by. Magpie: Not at all, for me anyway. I have already said I might have done the same thing. But I think I, like Harry, would know perfectly well that I was lying and putting one over on the teacher. I wouldn't convince myself I was actually what he thought I was, and neither does Harry. Nor do I see a parallel universe here. All the kids in Harry's class, imo, would see this as putting one over on the teacher and faking your way into a reputation that you haven't earned, and plenty of adults do this kind of thing as well. I'm not even sure which group would consider it a more serious issue. The kids might consider it more of a crime to claim talent for something you don't have ("fake" is something they seem to sieze on a lot throughout the books). Though in this case I don't think that's an issue since Harry himself isn't defending himself the way he's being defended here. He's not trying to convince anybody he's not just playing at an advantage to the other kids in the class while also having a teacher pre-disposed to fawn over him. He's never so crazy as to say to Hermione that he's actually the better student. He knows why his skills seem to drop dramatically to Slughorn when he's not using the book and he, too, is getting "less than mediocre" results--as if he's not better at following recipes either. Steve: So from the 'holier than thou' (for lack of a better way of expressing it) view of us clear-thinking adults, what Harry does is wrong. But I seriously doubt that there are many kids out there would wouldn't have pressed their advantage in the same way if given a chance. Magpie: Again, you seem to be mixing up "I don't think it's so bad" with "Harry's not doing anything wrong at all." One can think something is wrong without thinking it's a federal crime. One can think something's a kid thing to do without thinking it must therefore not be wrong. I also think you're underestimating kids here, or at least using shifting definitions of the word "wrong." When I was Harry's age, I was not above using a cheat sheet on a quiz if I could. I would never have told on somebody else if I saw them doing that. That, I assume, is fitting in with your "adults are the enemy" view. However, we all also knew that we were doing "wrong" in the sense that we were not taking the test honestly, and that this is the reason we'd have gotten in trouble if we were caught. We certainly didn't convince ourselves we weren't doing what we were doing, or that our results were no different from another kid who didn't have a secret advantage. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 24 16:22:34 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 16:22:34 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165384 Snow: > I had always thought that the draught of living death was a potion to put a stopper in death...something you take to make you appear dead > but you are still alive (like a Hamlet's Romeo and Juliet). > > The way I now can perceive this potion, from what you have said, is > that it keeps the dead alive. In other words, the inferius in the > cave are kept alive by a potion, the draught of living death. They > are kept alive even though they are quite dead. > > The potion isn't meant to keep people from dying, it is meant to keep those who are dead alive...in other words, stop death. The Inferi are the living dead! > > Dumbledore should have been dead from drinking the poison but > Voldemort wanted to know who could have broken his defenses of the > cave, so being made thirsty enough to drink from the lake not only > brought the inferius to life but kept Dumbledore alive as well, but > only for a time. The inferius live in the liquid so they can never > escape death. > Carol responds: I think your first idea is correct. Snape tells the students that the Draught of Living Death is a sleeping potion so powerful that the drinker appears to be dead. The Inferi *are* dead, and an Inferius can attack a person on land. We see them get out of the water, and Snape has a poster showing what happens to a person attacked by an Inferius. Besides, Dumbledore doesn't actually drink the water. Harry merely sprinkles it on his face and he forces himself to revive, just as, later, he forces himself to ride a broom and (temporarily?) remove the anti-flying charms around the castle. Dumbledore *says* that Voldemort would have wanted his victims to live long enough to tell him how they got in, but where's the evidence that he's right? LV certainly didn't show up in the cave to interrogate DD and Harry, and there's no evidence that he knows that the ring Horcrux was destroyed and the original locket stolen. I think that DD was just saying whatever was required to make sure that Harry forcefed him the potion, which clearly was a poison of some sort (I still think it's a poisoned memory). The water touching his skin allayed his thirst, but drinking the water was only supposed to arouse the Inferi, which would finish off the weakened victim. I do definitely think that the Draught of Living Death will play a role, but I think that Snape is keeping alive someone that he's pretended to kill. Emmeline Vance is my candidate. Why else bring her into the story? Carol, who gets shivers just thinking of Snow's hypothesis From celizwh at intergate.com Sat Feb 24 17:02:32 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 17:02:32 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165385 Carol: > He does fine the one time we see him fly, > as referee in a Quidditch game. If he were > a bad flyer, he'd never have volunteered for that job. houyhnhnm: On the other hand, Snape's willingness to referee (which we know by the end of PS was done to protect Harry from Quirrel) could be taken as evidence of his loyalty to DD and his determination to preserve Harry's life, *in spite of* the fact that he is a poor flyer ------------------------------------------ "I've never seen Snape look so mean," [Ron] told Hermione. ... [Harry] saw Snape land nearby, white-faced and tight-lipped-- ... Snape spat bitterly on the ground. ------------------------------------------ All of which is meant to convince the reader of Snape's antipathy to Harry and his desire to see Gryffindor's team defeated. But a white-faced, tight-lipped, mean face could just as well be seen on someone forcing himself to do something he was afraid of. And Snape could have spat on the ground, not because he was disgusted with Gryffindor's win, but because, short as it was, by the time the game was over, he was starting to throw up in his mouth. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 24 17:03:26 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 17:03:26 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165386 Carol earlier: > > > > You're still missing the main point, which is that *Harry is > receiving credit for the HBP's research and creativity.* > > > > Valky: > That's a fair statement, but, isn't it also a fair statement that in this year of Harry's life whether he is comprimising the integrity of his academic record is hardly the epitome of importance. Consider the end of his fifth year, he was possessed by Voldemort, he tasted death, and he lost one of his dearest loved ones all in one day... and then afterwards he is sat down by his mentor and informed that any day now.. could be tomorrow.. definitely very soon.. you will fight Voldemort to the death. You'll die or you'll be a murderer.. but either way the wizard world is counting on you to win Harry.. > > And after all of that, Harry is supposed to care much and feel guilty if he is getting through potions class without having to work hard, while learning powerful spells and techniques from the mysterious book? > > How can Harry be choosing easy over right, IMO easy would be to care > about the rigmarole of academic honesty, easy would be to microcosm > his energy into a square of reality significant only to him and his > reputation as a student. Whats easy about accepting at the age of > sixteen that the weight of the world rests on you getting one moment > in your life perfect even if its your last, whats easy about knowing > that you are marching towards an early death where what you achieve as a sixteen year old in your academic career is just so profoundly academic as to feel like a complete waste of time? Carol responds: Hi, Valky. I'm afraid that you're comparing apples and oranges, or rather. watermelons and kumquats. The fact that he's facing graver dangers than everyone else (although everyone else is also in danger with Voldemort back) does not excuse intellectual dishonesty, any more than a former student of mine could excuse plagiarizing an essay from the Internet with her grandmother's death. (She was lucky I didn't have her expelled.) And Potions, and Harry's academic career in general, *is* important to him. He wants to be an Auror. To do that, he has to score well on his NEWTs and take additional rigorous training. Will the Aurors want a kid who claims other people's research as his own? As for the dangers he's facing, they're not on Harry's mind. He's safe in Hogwarts, so he thinks. He's concerned about Quidditch, Ginny, and what Draco and Snape are up to. So, sorry. No excuses. Doing what's right over what's easy has nothing to do with other hard aspects of Harry's life. We do not give the kid a break because he's the hero. We hold him to high standards because he's the hero. Otherwise, we'd just teach him the Unforgiveables and other Dark Curses, send him after Voldemort to dispatch the bad guy, and be done with it. And draco at the moment is facing graver dangers than Harry, death threats to himself and his family if he doesn't complete his mission for Voldemort. Would those threats excuse him from using the HBP's book and claiming credit for his improvements (not just peppermint leaves) or turning in a borrowed Bezoar without doing the assignment? Why hold Harry to a higher standard than Draco when both are facing danger and Draco's is more imminent and pressing? Carol, hoping she doesn't sound sarcastic but surprised that Valky would offer such an argument From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 24 17:44:37 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 17:44:37 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165387 Carol earlier: > > > He does fine the one time we see him fly, as referee in a Quidditch game. If he were a bad flyer, he'd never have volunteered for that job. > houyhnhnm: > > On the other hand, Snape's willingness to referee (which we know by the end of PS was done to protect Harry from Quirrel) could be taken as evidence of his loyalty to DD and his determination to preserve Harry's life, *in spite of* the fact that he is a poor flyer > ------------------------------------------ > "I've never seen Snape look so mean," [Ron] told Hermione. > ... > [Harry] saw Snape land nearby, white-faced and tight-lipped-- > ... > Snape spat bitterly on the ground. > ------------------------------------------ > All of which is meant to convince the reader of Snape's antipathy to Harry and his desire to see Gryffindor's team defeated. Carol: Here, I agree with you. Classic JKR diversionary tactic. houyhnhnm: > But a white-faced, tight-lipped, mean face could just as well be seen on someone forcing himself to do something he was afraid of. > > And Snape could have spat on the ground, not because he was disgusted with Gryffindor's win, but because, short as it was, by the time the game was over, he was starting to throw up in his mouth. > Carol responds: But you're reading the evidence to fit your interpretation. I think that if he were a poor flyer, we would have seen some indication of that in the narrator's commentary. And surely, Harry and Ron would have commented on Snape's ineptitude and laughed at him. The spitting on the ground suggests bitter disappointment ("Snape spat bitterly on the ground"), not nausea from air sickness. If that were the case, he'd be vomiting or swaying and looking faint, not spitting "bitterly." We know that Snape refereed the game to prevent Quirrell from killing Harry. His bitterness must have something to do with being thwarted in his objective--or with being angry with Harry for some reason. (We can compare Karkaroff spitting on the ground when he thinks that Barty Sr. has Stunned Krum and accuses DD of "double dealing and corruption," the only other example of a wizard spitting in the books.) The white face also suggests that he's livid with anger for some reason. My guess is that Harry caught the Snitch too quickly and thwarted his attempt to expose Quirrell's murderous intent. The only other hint that Snape might be bad at flying is Lupin's supposed reason for Severus's dislike of James, that he was jealous of James's talent for Quidditch, and we know quite well that his hatred has an entirely different basis, including the use of his own spells against him, the so-called Prank, and James's "arrogance" in not believing that Black was the spy and traitor. Brooms don't buck off their riders unless they're jinxed. Compare Harry's broom when Quirrell is jinxing it in SS/PS. And what purpose could be served by showing that Snape, so good at every other form of magic we've seen him attempt, is bad at flying? Is there some need to undermine the image of his powers that starts building with the DADA lesson in CoS, or even the task he sets up in the thir-floor corridor, and builds throughout the books? I'm sure he's not as good at flying as Harry, but neither is anyone else (except Viktor Krum, the world's greatest Seeker, and the Irish Chasers at the QWC). Carol, not at all questioning Snape's loyalty to DD, but thinking that it and his courage are much better illustrated when he goes off to face Voldemort at the end of GoF From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Feb 24 18:05:20 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 18:05:20 -0000 Subject: Killing Snape (was Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165388 Lupinlore: > The situation with Boromir in LOTR, much discussed in other threads, is > perhaps more to the point. That is that offering up one's life is the > final act of penance. Pippin: But Boromir didn't offer his life as an act of penance. He fought to the death to save Merry and Pippin. We may trust he would have done that anyway, as he would have stayed by Gandalf in Moria if there had not been lesser folk to care for. In any case, Boromir had no intention of dying -- he blew his horn to summon aid. But his fall from grace seems to mean that he was no longer protected by it. Though help came in answer to the horn, it came too late to rescue him. Still, he was granted Aragorn's assurance of his worth and a peaceful death. But I can't imagine that Lupinlore really wants to hear Harry say to dying Snape, "No, you have conquered! Few have gained such a victory. Be at peace. Hogwarts shall not fall!" And then, far from making a object lesson of Boromir's lapse, Aragorn kept it secret. Boromir was not forced to confess his sins to the whole world, nor did Aragorn conceive that it was his duty to make sure everyone knew about them. Lupinlore: > But all of this may miss the point. God may forgive any sin for the > price of sincere contrition (under one set of theories, not universally > held), but the world and human society does not. Pippin: And Christianity, or one interpretation of it, holds them at fault for that. "Let the one who is without sin cast the first stone." What Boromir's death accomplishes is not the escape from human vengeance. Aragorn personifies human justice in LOTR, and he pardoned Boromir and would have shown mercy even to Saruman. It just puts Boromir in a safe place, morally, where we can be sure his pride and ambition will not tempt him further. The Tolkien character who corresponds to DDM!Snape, IMO, would be Galadriel, who fell from grace when she defied the Valar and lived to prove she had redeemed herself by rejecting the Ring, or at least that is the version of the story we get in The Road Goes Ever On. Tolkien seems to have decided later that as a good Catholic he was uncomfortable with this idea, I suppose because she shouldn't have been able to redeem herself completely until Christ's sacrifice had obtained more grace for the world. But fortunately the WW is a Christian or post-Christian society (all those painted and ghostly monks and nuns) so this objection need not obtain. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Feb 24 18:28:39 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 18:28:39 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165389 > Carol responds: > > This is just a small aside. I'm not sure that Teen!Snape is practicing > killing flies in the sense of practicing killing people. My sense in > that memory is that he's just bored, a teenage boy with nowhere to go > and nothing to do. Pippin: That may have been how Snape felt at the time. But Snape wasn't extracting random memories from Harry, he was extracting memories that would make Harry feel humiliated, and that was the spell that Harry turned back on him with protego. So regardless of how Snape felt when he was actually shooting down the flies, I don't think it's a memory he is comfortable with now. Similarly, Harry certainly didn't feel humiliated when Cho kissed him, but he's frantic not to be forced to share the memory with Snape -- ewww. We don't know what spell Snape was using in the memory and we don't know whether there was any light, red, green or polkadot, but why would Snape feel humiliated or ashamed to recall it if he was just using the WW equivalent of a flyswatter? Pippin From celizwh at intergate.com Sat Feb 24 18:51:41 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 18:51:41 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165390 Carol: > I think that if he were a poor flyer, > we would have seen some indication of > that in the narrator's commentary. And > surely, Harry and Ron would have commented > on Snape's ineptitude and laughed at him. houyhnhnm: There isn't much commentary on the action in the air. Snape awards a penalty to Hufflepuff because George Weasley hit a bludger at him. Hermione is squinting fixedly at Harry (and thus cannot observe anything of Snape's behavior) and then we are distracted by the skuffle between Draco and Neville. Next thing we know, Harry has his arm raised triumphantly, clasping the Snitch. Snape's performance on the broom could have been nothing more than barely adequate. Carol: > The spitting on the ground suggests bitter > disappointment ("Snape spat bitterly on the > ground"), not nausea from air sickness. If > that were the case, he'd be vomiting or swaying > and looking faint, not spitting "bitterly." houyhnhnm: I am never more suspicious of Rowling's adverbs than when they are applied to Snape. (Read through PS descriptions of Snape, taking out all the adverbs as well as the references to greasy hair and hooked nose and you almost get a different character-JMO, of course) But even if "bitterly" is an objective description of Snape's state of mind, and not just Harry's interpretation, Snape could well be bitter about the lengths to which his (so far mysterious) obligation to protect Harry has taken him--having to get on a broom in front of the whole school, for crying out loud. Carol: > not at all questioning Snape's loyalty to DD, but > thinking that it and his courage are much better > illustrated when he goes off to face Voldemort at > the end of GoF houyhnhnm: Thinking that getting on a broom in front of the whole school for the sake of the cause, when you are a poor flyer, shows a great deal of courage. From rduran1216 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 24 19:00:21 2007 From: rduran1216 at yahoo.com (rduran1216) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 19:00:21 -0000 Subject: Workings of the Cover-up Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165391 What if Severus Snape had been sent to kill Regulus Black by Voldemort? That would put a nice little bow on some of the more mysterious aspects of this situation. rduran1216 From talisman22457 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 24 19:05:45 2007 From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 19:05:45 -0000 Subject: DDH!Snape (was Killing Snape (was Re: Snape and Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165392 > Lupinlore: > What would be the narrative purpose?[of Snape living] To close off Snape's story, I suppose. After all, what place would he have in a world where all the developments that define him, all the questions that frame his story, are resolved? He would be a being out of his time, a relic from a past now thankfully put to rest. > Ceridwen: >snip< > Do all of the developments that define Snape live in the past? He >is still a powerful wizard; he has been shown to be handy with an > apparently complex healing spell; he is young enough, especially in > the WW, to move on and create another life for himself. Simply > leaving would be as radical a change. In my opinion, of course. Talisman: Having been relieved of all my *death of Snape* anxieties(: P) I'm fully back to betting that he will live. And Handsomely. Certainly Snape points to the past. His powerful motivations coil out from the dark heart of the still largely inscrutable back story. Of course it's true that all of the major plot lines, now coursing toward their denouement, spring, in some fashion, from that inky well. But whereas most characters, even our eponymous Harry, seem to have been swept up into the passing storm, Snape rides at the very eye of it. It's easy to see how one might expect Snape to dissipate with the dark clouds; to have no place in any sunny morning to come. But, tarry a moment. This character: the lonely warrior, powerful and unfathomable, full of secrets and sorrows, willing to bear the scorn of the world he protects, has graced our pages in more than one form. Indeed the similarities between Snape and Dumbledore are legion, though those who magnify the teenage Death Eater and discount the hardened Order leader may find it more difficult to see. Any misstep a youthful Snape may have taken will be shown to be no worse than whatever it is that DD was confessing in the cave. No living wizard rivals the powers of DD (or bests LV) except Snape. And, lest we forget, as Ceridwen reminded, Snape is quite young, even by Muggle standards. Throughout the series Snape is thirty-something to DD's 150- something. Young, yet more than equal to the tasks of the Deathly Hallows--his epilogue potential is beyond reckoning. Not only is there no other candidate to fill DD's role in the WW, but those who understand what actually transpired on the ramparts know Snape has already assumed the mantle. Snape is DD's heir. So I proffer DD'sHeir!Snape (DDH!Snape) as an important and necessary survivor of the final chapter. If not biologically related, Snape is nevertheless the son of DD's bosom and the only person to whom DD could entrust the well-being of his precious magical world. Harry will grab Ginny by the hand and run laughing into the sun- drenched meadows. Then, as the camera slowly pulls away, we will see Snape, high in the shadows of his lonely tower, watching the horizon, moving the chess pieces. Talisman, raising her goblet to DDH!Snape: The King is dead, long live the King. P.S. Snape isn't in need of forgiveness, but perhaps, in the course of DH, a few more readers will be redeemed. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 24 19:36:36 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 19:36:36 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165394 Carol earlier: > > > > This is just a small aside. I'm not sure that Teen!Snape is practicing killing flies in the sense of practicing killing people. > My sense in that memory is that he's just bored, a teenage boy with nowhere to go and nothing to do. > > Pippin: > That may have been how Snape felt at the time. > > But Snape wasn't extracting random memories from Harry, he was extracting memories that would make Harry feel humiliated, and that was the spell that Harry turned back on him with protego. So regardless of how Snape felt when he was actually shooting down the flies, I don't think it's a memory he is comfortable with now. > > Similarly, Harry certainly didn't feel humiliated when Cho kissed him, but he's frantic not to be forced to share the memory with Snape -- ewww. > > We don't know what spell Snape was using in the memory and we don't know whether there was any light, red, green or polkadot, but why would Snape feel humiliated or ashamed to recall it if he was just using the WW equivalent of a flyswatter? > > Pippin > Carol responds: Harry's acidental Protego just deflected the Legilimens spell that Snape was using onto Snape because Harry didn't want Snape to see anything related to Cho--which, as you say, was not a humiliating memory, just one he didn't want Snape to see. That in itself is proof that Snape wasn't casting a spell to extract humiliating memories. The same is true for Harry's memory of Petrified!Hermione--not a happy memory, but not humiliating. I don't think that a Legilimens spell can be that specific. I think that both Snape's spell and Harry's accidental Protego extracted random memories. That they were mostly unhappy ones probably results from the fact that both Harry and Snape had (mostly) unhappy childhoods. Think how much trouble Harry had coming up with a happy memory to use for his Patronus in PoA. And, IMO, the absence of light in the fly memory *is* significant. If it were green, an AK, surely the narrator would have pointed that out and Harry would have noticed. He has, after all, seen Fake!Moody murdering a spider in GoF, and I don't think he'd have been as sympathetic toward the crying child in the first memory if he thought that the teenager in the third memory was a budding DE practicing Unforgiveable Curses for later use on people. (We have no evidence that Snape killed anyone before the tower and the testimony of Bellatrix that he frequently "slithered out of action.") Carol, who hopes that next time someone sees her swatting a fly, they don't assume that she's practicing on flies as a prelude to murdering people From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Feb 24 20:22:49 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 20:22:49 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165395 > Carol responds: > Harry's acidental Protego just deflected the Legilimens spell that > Snape was using onto Snape because Harry didn't want Snape to see > anything related to Cho--which, as you say, was not a humiliating > memory, just one he didn't want Snape to see. That in itself is proof > that Snape wasn't casting a spell to extract humiliating memories. The > same is true for Harry's memory of Petrified!Hermione--not a happy > memory, but not humiliating. > Pippin: I think you're confusing two episodes here. Harry's memory of Cho wasn't shielded by protego, it was shielded by an involuntary stinging hex. The protego comes later, when Snape has just been extracting memories of Harry's humilations in primary school. But surely legilimens is specific, how else could Snape pull out just the memory of that book which Harry was so desperate to hide? You can't tell me *that* was random. I am not saying that Snape was practicing killing flies in order to teach himself to kill people, or that it's wrong to kill pests. It's probably not even wrong to kill them with Avada Kedavra, which is banned only against humans. But I think Snape was using the flies for target practice, whatever the spell, and that he now feels that wasting life in such a fashion was wrong and a prelude to greater wrongs. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Feb 24 20:30:26 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 20:30:26 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165396 > houyhnhnm: > > Thinking that getting on a broom in front of the > whole school for the sake of the cause, when you > are a poor flyer, shows a great deal of courage. > Pippin: Brave but stupid is not the way I would characterize Snape. A poor flyer who has to keep most of his attention on controlling his broom is not going to be much use if anything bad happens. He'd be much better off on the ground, where he can devote his whole attention to Harry. That he takes to the air shows that he has confidence in his flying ability, IMO. If he was indeed unable to match James's success at Quidditch, perhaps it was for some other reason, like not being able to afford a broom, or being kept off the team for unrelated reasons, like McClaggan. Pippin From celizwh at intergate.com Sat Feb 24 21:11:17 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 21:11:17 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165397 Pippin: > Brave but stupid is not the way I would characterize > Snape. A poor flyer who has to keep most of his > attention on controlling his broom is not going to > be much use if anything bad happens. He'd be much > better off on the ground, where he can devote his > whole attention to Harry. houyhnhnm: I shouldn't have used the words "poor flyer". Maybe "not fond of flying" would have been better. I myself am quite competent at climbing up on ladders. That doesn't mean I don't hate every minute of it, nor that I am not white-faced and tight-lipped by the time I climb down. I expect Snape had managed to overcome his awkwardness on a broom by the time he was potions master and HOH. That doesn't mean it wouldn't still have been an unpleasant experience, especially in front of a large crowd. I wonder why he did it. Quirrell says, "... he needn't have bothered. I couldn't do anything with Dumbledore watching." And Dumbledore's comments to Harry in the hospital wing seem to imply that Snape was acting on his own initiative rather than following DD's instructions. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Feb 25 01:38:38 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 01:38:38 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: <004501c7582e$65954610$2e8c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165398 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > I honestly don't remember what Carol said, > but I didn't think there was any question that Harry > was making his life easier in terms of fighting Voldemort. I > thought he was facing a very limited situation--a regular class in > school--and in that situation he's blatantly choosing easy over > right by giving himself a secret advantage over other kids. Valky now: It is here that you have narrowed down my point for me. This perspective of this being a very limited situation, whose perspective is that ? Harry's ? No. It's not. Is Harry in a regular class in a regular day at school each day he grows more attached to the HBP's textbook? No. To say he is is just blinkered thinking. To say an academic advantage over other kids is anywhere near foremost on Harry's mind is just bogus. He admits it feels good to outdo Hermione for once in his life, yes, and then shortly after goes right back to thinking about things like; Whats Malfoy the DE up to? What's Dumbledore going to teach me? Everything is in terms of fighting Voldemort, that is the reality of Harry's situation, and the only reason he even stays at school in sixth year IMHO. > Magpie: > I think I'm not getting what you're saying. Here it seems like > you're saying that Harry's getting an undeserved reputation in > Potions is somehow a sacrifice as the Chosen One, because by having > his class taken care of he can concentrate on Voldemort. Valky: No I'm saying that an undeserved reputation in Potions class is a feel good side effect of Harry trying to focus in on what he believes is right and more pressing and important than Potions Marks. He doesn't see it as an ultimate advantage to be in the Slug Club or to get the best marks in the class work, with the exception of competing for the Felix Felicis (something that *can* be used for a purpose that will really matter) he isn't concerned if he gets NO Marks. Isn't this evidenced by him experimenting with the potions notes to begin with? How was he to know that they would work so brilliantly? The fact is he didn't know they would produce a work of genius, all he knew was that they presented an option to explore in the course of his day, and that is what appealed to him from the start. Options. Not advantages in situations that don't ultimately pay any dividends in his life, just options in a life that doesn't seem to have any. Magpie: > But I don't think Harry ever presents the > situation to himself like that, or that it ever has that effect one > way or the other. Valky: I'll have to find the quote, but IIRC, Harry says to Ron and Hermione at some stage that it would be a good idea to keep the HBP's text just in case it has something extraordinary in it that will help him against Voldemort. Magpie: > It sounds like you're saying > Harry's difficulties in life put him above right and wrong, or turn > everything he does into something right. No, that's not what I am saying, it's missing the point completely. I'm saying he makes his choice from his perspective, and his perspective is that he's probably going to die before he's an adult. He can't escape that to care about whether he is being Percy Weasley perfect on his way to the gallows. It seems to me that both you and Carol think somehow he must be psychologically above the pain of facing this reality at sixteen years old. How can he be? Would you be? Why is it such a bad and wrong thing to have empathy with Harry's situation? It's a bleak day the kid faces, why is it so hard to just consider his attachment to Snape's notes as a blunder made by a child under enormous pressure rather than some plan he concocted for an end that doesn't even matter to him. Is that a clearer explanation of my position? From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Feb 25 02:12:18 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 02:12:18 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165399 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > Hi, Valky. I'm afraid that you're comparing apples and oranges, or > rather. watermelons and kumquats. The fact that he's facing graver > dangers than everyone else (although everyone else is also in danger > with Voldemort back) does not excuse intellectual dishonesty, any > more than a former student of mine could excuse plagiarizing an > essay from the Internet with her grandmother's death. (She was lucky > I didn't have her expelled.) Valky: Hi Carol. No I disagree with this analogy completely. How is this comparable? We're not talking about Harry's "Grandmother" dying, we're talking about **him** dying. This is that same as if the girl in your story has said 'I was told this week that I have three months to live, why should I care about your stupid essay whats so important about it? I'm dying now and nothing can stop it.' Carol: > > And Potions, and Harry's academic career in general, *is* important > to him. He wants to be an Auror. Valky: Yeah, he would like to be an Auror. But what makes you think he really belives that's an option? He picked Auror from a list because he knew what it was and because he had to choose something there and then and tell his career counsel. Neither of these things are exactly the measure of conviction, are they. OTOH we have the measure of Harry's conviction and commitment to the fight against Voldemort. This bears out in all his actions. Carol: > As for the dangers he's facing, they're not on Harry's mind. He's > safe in Hogwarts, so he thinks. He's concerned about Quidditch, > Ginny, and what Draco and Snape are up to. So, sorry. No excuses. Valky: I'm not trying for excuses, I'm pointing out that good NEWT or cheat NEWT, Newts don't matter to him. You said yourself, he's concerned with what Snape and Draco are up to; he's also concerned with what DD has to teach him, and he's concerned very strongly with the welfare and happiness of his clasmates and friends, this is what he's concerned about, he's not even that worried about Quidditch - when his skull is broken and he wakes up in the Hospital the loser by a huge margin it doesn't take him long to start worrying about who Malfoy is trying to kill, again, and when he is kept from the final game by Snape's detention it's not the end of the world like it usually has been for Harry to miss an important Quidditch game in the series. Carol: Doing what's > right over what's easy has nothing to do with other hard aspects of > Harry's life. We do not give the kid a break because he's the hero. We > hold him to high standards because he's the hero. Valky: I agree with that. But I don't think these standards (academic honesty) are so high in this situation. I've said they are ultimately petty and that's what I meant. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 02:26:59 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 02:26:59 -0000 Subject: Killing Snape (was Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165400 > >>Betsy Hp: > > I'm hopeful that it wasn't a real AK for one reason and one > > reason only: I want Snape to live. If Snape really *did* > > actively kill Dumbledore (rather than merely removing the life- > > support if you will) than I suspect he's going to die for moral > > reasons. As a murderer, JKR will have to kill him off, no matter > > the reason for the murder. > > Sort of like how in a gothic story, if the ingenue is actually > > raped by the villain she dies. > > > >>Lupinlore: > The situation with Boromir in LOTR, much discussed in other > threads, is perhaps more to the point. That is that offering up > one's life is the final act of penance. > Betsy Hp: Hmm, actually I think it misses the point. I'm not talking about penance at all, because I'm assuming that Snape's actions on the Tower were taken on the orders of Dumbledore (implied if not implicit). If Snape *did* murder Dumbledore, he did so because Dumbledore told him to do so. Just as the gothic maiden was raped by the villain and didn't *choose* to serve his evil lusts, Snape murdered because of another's will. However, based on the moral rules of the tale, just as the maiden's stolen virtue will never be restored in this life, Snape will never be clean until he dies. So in killing them, the author is actually being merciful. Do I *like* that view point? No. But it's a familiar trope and one I think JKR would play. Murder is a massively big deal in Potterverse. The good guys aren't supposed to do it. And if a good guy is forced to do it, to become so unclean, I'm betting only death would cleanse him. > >>Lupinlore: > So, to this point we have plentiful precedent for moral harshness > and uninventive and standard plot developments. What would be the > narrative purpose? To close off Snape's story, I suppose. After > all, what place would he have in a world where all the developments > that define him, all the questions that frame his story, are > resolved? > Betsy Hp: Death as a definitive "the end"? JKR has an epilogue planned, so I don't think she needs to kill characters just to end their story. A retirement to the south of France would serve the same purpose. > >>Lupinlore: > What would be the moral purpose? I guess to illustrate redemption > and its price. Redemption, perhaps, is a moral necessity, but > nothing about its necessity makes it cheap. > Betsy Hp: I honestly don't see that death is enough of a price for redemption. It actually strikes me as a fairly cheap way to go. (I'm betting on that sort of cheap end for Pettigrew for that reason.) Since I'm DDM! Snape I think Snape has been walking the (long and painful) road of redemption since the opening chapter of PS/SS. So I don't see Snape's death as necessary for redemptive reasons. > >>Lupinlore: > And certainly Snapey-poo has plenty to pay for since the death of > the Potters (i.e, the whole problem with his abuse of children), > and even DD has not claimed to see contrition and penance for that. > Betsy Hp: This is, of course, an area we'll *never* see eye to eye (you say abuser, I say strict teacher ). None of Snape's actions during Harry's time at school strike me as needing something as intense as redemption. I'm not expecting (nor would I want) a squeaky clean Snape at the end of the series. However, if circumstances conspired to force Snape into a position where he had to murder on that Tower, if it really was an AK that Snape threw at Dumbledore, then I do think Snape is tainted with something only death will cleanse. As per the rules of JKR's world, anyway. Betsy Hp (nips Snapey-poo under the chin; wanders off to peel him some grapes) From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 03:02:07 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 03:02:07 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165401 > >>Valky: > ... [Harry's]concerned with what Snape and Draco are up to; > he's also concerned with what DD has to teach him, and he's > concerned very strongly with the welfare and happiness of his > clasmates and friends, this is what he's concerned about, he's not > even that worried about Quidditch ... Betsy Hp: I don't see this Harry at *all* in HBP. It's Hermione, not Harry who keeps track of who's died. Harry blows off Dumbledore's mission to get Slughorn's memory. Harry *does* worry about Quidditch (that's what he first exclaims about when Snape gives him detention). And Harry spends a *lot* of time worrying about wanting to kiss Ginny. Yes, Harry does think and worry about his Voldemort mission, but not to the exclusion of everything else. I just don't see the angsty, I'm going to die tomorrow, no need to study because *I'm going TO DIE!!* Harry you describe. (Actually, Draco more fits that profile, blowing off school and quidditch for his mission.) > >>Valky: > > But I don't think these standards (academic honesty) are so high in > this situation. I've said they are ultimately petty and that's what > I meant. Betsy Hp: Hmm... See, I think especially as Harry takes on The Forces of Evil (tm) he actually needs to watch the slippery slope of "I'm so good normal rules of decent behavior need not apply". We've already had the Barty Crouch warning on that. And the Umbridge one for that matter. Though, to be honest, Harry knows what he's doing is a form of cheating and lying. It's why he doesn't verbally share the Prince's notes with Ron (to avoid Slughorn's catching on), and it's why he doesn't relish the "potion's genius" title. It's all of his listie parents who keep twisting things into a "not *my* son" direction. Betsy Hp From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 03:03:19 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 03:03:19 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: <004501c7582e$65954610$2e8c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165402 Mike interjecting now: I think Valky might be hitting on something here that we've all overlooked, including me. I'm hoping to accurately re-phrase her position here. Harry has matured and moved on from his more simple academic days. He looks at everything now from the prism of 'How will this help me defeat Voldemort?' He's back at Hogwarts because that's where Dumbledore is and less than two weeks from the end of fifth year, Dumbledore has already sent a letter to let Harry know things have changed. By the end of that pick-up-at-the-Dursleys night, Dumbledore has already informed Harry that he will be taking a special interest in his training. Sure, Harry is going to classes trying to continue his education. But, 1) like Geoff said, where else is he going to go? To do what? And, 2) like Valky said, Harry is there because Dumbledore is there. These are the two major reasons for his attendance. Everything associated with school is of secondary importance right now. Also, notice how much of the time Harry spends concerning himself with Draco and what he's doing compared to how little time we spend with Harry in class. School has become a periphery concern, not totally ignored, but his academic performance does not occupy the top place in the grand scheme of things anymore. Now some will say that JKR has indeed shown Harry is interested in his academic performance and point to his new-found potion brilliance and accolades as the indicator. Nobody is saying that Harry isn't enjoying an easier time because of the HBP. And, nobody is saying that Harry is correcting that new potions brilliance moniker he's gotten from the HBP book. What Valky is saying (and I'm agreeing with) is: In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165378 Valky: Pleasing Slughorn in class would surely seem like a petty and unimportant goal, while the option of having the onus to do that off your back while you concentrate on other things that you feel are vital.. wouldn't that seem the right path ? This is in conjunction with what Steve said: In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165380 Steve/bboyminn: While Harry certainly sees Slughorn as far more benevolent than Snape, he none the less sees Slughorn for what he is, and he is not pleased. Slughorn wants him for a trophy, Slughorn sucks up to him because Harry is famous, and that is exactly the type of person Harry has made a constant effort to avoid. Mike: IOW, what comes across as Harry's oppurtunistic cheating to some, comes across as an apathy towards correcting Slughorn to others. Harry has never seeked out praise, Harry doesn't particularly like Slughorn, Harry is aware of Slughorn's collecting talent motif, and Harry doesn't particularly care what Slughorn thinks of him. The *only* time Harry cares about Slughorn's attention (and the only time Steve, myself and others think Harry is lying by omission) is when he brews the Euphoria Elixer. But Harry has an ulterior motive in this case, trying to get the memory out of Slughorn. What Valky is trying to tell us is that Harry cares not a wit for what Slughorn thinks of him, he *needs* that memory and *that* is what he cares about. Harry has a higher calling now, he's using the HBP's brilliance to further his cause. So Slughorn thinks his brilliance comes from his mother, so what? Harry only cares about his ability to exploit that advantage to get things he needs to fight Voldemort. And Magpie, you said it yourself: In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165383 Magpie: Though in this case I don't think that's an issue since Harry himself isn't defending himself the way he's being defended here. Mike: Why did we miss this? Here we all are trying to defend Harry's use of the book, while Harry isn't. Why isn't Harry? Maybe because Harry doesn't feel a need to. Maybe because Harry just thinks of the book's potions brilliance as relieving him of one more nuisance, namely studying for potions work. Harry does have a twinge of conscience after he wins the Felix, but after that he simply wants Hermione to stop with the nagging. He defends the "Prince" with regards to his dodginess, but not himself for using the book. That's what Valky is trying expkain to us. Plus, of course, Harry is really enjoying discovering all those new spells. But that's just a side benefit, and though he defends the Prince against Hermione, none of us really had a problem with those until we got to Sectumsempra. This is all a side issue. The big picture is that Harry has shifted his focus. Now, please don't think I'm saying it's wrong to discuss the morality of Harry using the book to gain an advantage. I'm just pointing out that there is an element that many of us missed and Valky has correctly brought to the fore. And there is an element of maturing Harry that I know I missed. I've lamented Harry not advancing magically as he prepares to battle Voldemort while missing his psychological/state of mind advancement. Mea Culpa! Mike, who hopes he did justice to Valky's position and hoping she accepts his apology if he's mis-stated it :-) From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 02:45:53 2007 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (jennifer) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 02:45:53 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: <1284177.1172078001492.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165403 > From: eggplant107 > People say Harry cheated in potions, but nobody can point to a > rule he violated. There is certainly no rule saying you can only > use your textbook to complete your studies, otherwise Hogwarts > wouldn't have a library. Harry didn't lie, he never told > Slughorn "I was only reading the standard textbook". Harry not only > followed the letter of the law he followed the spirit of the law > too. He found a way to do things that was better than that idiotic > textbook and he ran with it. Good for him! > Bart: > Even if Harry didn't break a single rule, he cheated the most > important person of all: himself. In return for some praise from a > teacher, he gave up a learning opportunity. It is clear that the > NEWT level Potions is about learning theory and applying it. All > Harry learned was some superior applications, which made it > unecessary for him to learn the theory. While I agree with both of you. Harry did not break any rules by using the extra instructions in the book but I feel that he should have at least showed it to Professor Dumbledore or Professor Slughorn and got an opinion from someone older and a lot wiser than himself. In not getting this opinion he left himself open to Snape's discipline with the bathroom scene with Draco. Even though Snape called him a cheat, it is Harry's fault because he did not report the book. Jennifer From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 03:23:47 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 03:23:47 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating/ Harry's thoughts processes in HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165404 > > >>Valky: > > ... [Harry's]concerned with what Snape and Draco are up to; > > he's also concerned with what DD has to teach him, and he's > > concerned very strongly with the welfare and happiness of his > > clasmates and friends, this is what he's concerned about, he's not > > even that worried about Quidditch ... > > Betsy Hp: > I don't see this Harry at *all* in HBP. It's Hermione, not Harry who > keeps track of who's died. Harry blows off Dumbledore's mission to > get Slughorn's memory. Harry *does* worry about Quidditch (that's > what he first exclaims about when Snape gives him detention). And > Harry spends a *lot* of time worrying about wanting to kiss Ginny. > > Yes, Harry does think and worry about his Voldemort mission, but not > to the exclusion of everything else. > > I just don't see the angsty, I'm going to die tomorrow, no need to > study because *I'm going TO DIE!!* Harry you describe. (Actually, > Draco more fits that profile, blowing off school and quidditch for > his mission.) Alla: Oh, I totally see that Harry that Valky describes, absolutely. Now granted he worries about other things well, but I guess I would totally put his thoughts about Prophecy and his mission as occupying him a lot. Even if he does not talk about it all the time, which really has only do with his academic cheating as much as Valky describes - that it is not what Harry is primarily worrying about. "But, sir," said Harry, making valiant efforts not to sound argumentative, "it all comes to the same thing, doesn't it? I've got to try and kill him, or ___" ************** "That one of us is going to end up killing the other."said Harry, "Yes" but he understood at last what DD had been trying to tell him. It was, he thought, the difference between being dragged into the arena to face a battle to the death and walking into the arena with your head held high. Some people, perhaps, would say that there was little to choose between two ways, but Dumbledore knew - and so do I, thought Harry, with a rush of fierce pride, and so did my parents - that there was all the difference in the world" - p.512, HBP. Alla: I cut the quote rather arbitrarily here - cannot type up two pages, did not mean to miss anything which may seem important to other people, just too much to type, but you get the gist of my argument. Harry sounds plenty angsty here to me, and this seems to me as one of the important points in the book, which again does not say to me that cheating is right or something, just that academics may indeed not be the most important thing on Harry's mind, that's all. > Betsy Hp: >> Though, to be honest, Harry knows what he's doing is a form of > cheating and lying. It's why he doesn't verbally share the Prince's > notes with Ron (to avoid Slughorn's catching on), and it's why he > doesn't relish the "potion's genius" title. It's all of his listie > parents who keep twisting things into a "not *my* son" direction. > Alla: I truthfully do not understand what you meant by your last sentence. "Twisting things into not my son direction"? What does it mean? From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Feb 25 03:51:05 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 22:51:05 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On lying and cheating References: Message-ID: <014401c75890$2df0f710$2e8c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165405 Magpie" wrote: >> I honestly don't remember what Carol said, >> but I didn't think there was any question that Harry >> was making his life easier in terms of fighting Voldemort. I >> thought he was facing a very limited situation--a regular class in >> school--and in that situation he's blatantly choosing easy over >> right by giving himself a secret advantage over other kids. > > Valky now: > > It is here that you have narrowed down my point for me. This > perspective of this being a very limited situation, whose perspective > is that ? Harry's ? > > No. It's not. > > Is Harry in a regular class in a regular day at school each day he > grows more attached to the HBP's textbook? > > No. > > To say he is is just blinkered thinking. To say an academic advantage > over other kids is anywhere near foremost on Harry's mind is just > bogus. He admits it feels good to outdo Hermione for once in his life, > yes, and then shortly after goes right back to thinking about things > like; Whats Malfoy the DE up to? What's Dumbledore going to teach me? > Everything is in terms of fighting Voldemort, that is the reality of > Harry's situation, and the only reason he even stays at school in > sixth year IMHO. Magpie: I don't see that it really matters whether an academic advantage is foremost in Harry's mind when he does it. It seems like you're whole argument is that things like academic honesty are petty when you're a guy like Harry who's got the weight of the world on his shoulders. And that's a possible position, but these things being "petty" in Harry's eyes doesn't mean Harry's not taking the easy way over the right way in his Potions class sixth year. Maybe in your view he's owed this bit of easy because the rest of his life is so right, but that's different than it being right because Harry's life is hard. Lots of kids think school is stupid and not worth their time, and sometimes that affects how they approach their classwork. But not thinking it makes a difference whether you're scrupulously honest about what credit you get doesn't mean there's no difference in being honest or not. I think you summed it up nicely in speaking to Carol here, when she compared it to her student saying she had to plagiarize her essay because her grandmother died and schoolwork didn't seem so important to her anymore: Valky: Hi Carol. No I disagree with this analogy completely. How is this comparable? We're not talking about Harry's "Grandmother" dying, we're talking about **him** dying. This is that same as if the girl in your story has said 'I was told this week that I have three months to live, why should I care about your stupid essay whats so important about it? I'm dying now and nothing can stop it.' Magpie: So Harry doesn't care enough to do it the right way and would rather do it the easy way. He doesn't care enough about the stupid class to do it the right/hard way. He's doing it the easy way, because it's easy and it's not worth doing the right way and he'd rather spend his time focusing on the stuff he cares about doing right. The only difference being that you think facing a Dark Lord's worse than having your grandmother die. I think most of us would agree, but it doesn't change the logic that I can see. (And I actually don't see Harry being motivated by this attitude, but for the purposes of the argument I'm imagining it to be true.) > Valky: > No I'm saying that an undeserved reputation in Potions class is a feel > > good side effect of Harry trying to focus in on what he believes is > > right and more pressing and important than Potions Marks. Magpie: Harry is not using the Prince's book as a way of focusing on Voldemort. He likes reading it and getting help from it. He enjoys the book, period. Valky: > He doesn't see it as an ultimate advantage to be in the Slug Club or > to > get the best marks in the class work, with the exception of > competing > for the Felix Felicis (something that *can* be used for a > purpose that > will really matter) he isn't concerned if he gets NO > Marks. Isn't this > evidenced by him experimenting with the potions > notes to begin with? > How was he to know that they would work so > brilliantly? Magpie: The first time he uses the Prince's book it is to get something that actually does connect to a larger issue. (And he can easily experiment because he had nothing to lose doing it the real way--Hermione's probably going to win that way.) But that doesn't explain his later presenting himself as a Potions genius, which is a different issue than his just using the directions in his book. His not caring about the Slug Club, which he's in no matter how well he does in Potions, doesn't seem all that relevent. If anything it seems to undermine your point. What's Harry's reputation as a Potions genius getting him in terms of Voldemort? Because it gets him in with Slughorn? If that's his goal he'd go to a Slug Club meeting. Valky: The fact is he didn't know they would produce a work of > genius, all he knew was that they presented an option to explore in > the course of his day, and that is what appealed to him from the > start. Options. Not advantages in situations that don't ultimately pay > > any dividends in his life, just options in a life that doesn't seem to > > have any. Magpie: Of course he didn't know what they would produce the first time--but nobody's accusing him of doing wrong by using them the first time. Or even using them at all. We're not even calling for some sort of punishment for his keeping the book. We're saying when he pretends to be something he isn't and takes credit for things he didn't do, he's pretending to be something that he's not and taking credit for things he didn't do. > Magpie: >> But I don't think Harry ever presents the >> situation to himself like that, or that it ever has that effect one >> way or the other. > > Valky: > I'll have to find the quote, but IIRC, Harry says to Ron and Hermione > at some stage that it would be a good idea to keep the HBP's text just > in case it has something extraordinary in it that will help him > against Voldemort. Magpie: But there's no problem with Harry's having the book, keeping the book, or learning from the book. The issue is just putting one over on the teacher and giving himself a shortcut other students don't have and pretending it's just natural talent. It's not a horrible thing for Harry to be doing, just run-of-the-mill teenaged dishonesty. It has nothing to do with keeping the book for Voldemort-related reasons. He's not forced to give himself a secret advantage in class and let the teacher think he's a genius in order to keep the book. > Magpie: >> It sounds like you're saying >> Harry's difficulties in life put him above right and wrong, or turn >> everything he does into something right. Valky:> > No, that's not what I am saying, it's missing the point completely.> I'm > saying he makes his choice from his perspective, and his> perspective is > that he's probably going to die before he's an adult.> He can't escape > that to care about whether he is being Percy Weasley> perfect on his way > to the gallows. It seems to me that both you and> Carol think somehow he > must be psychologically above the pain of> facing this reality at sixteen > years old. How can he be? Would you be?> Why is it such a bad and wrong > thing to have empathy with Harry's> situation? It's a bleak day the kid > faces, why is it so hard to just> consider his attachment to Snape's notes > as a blunder made by a child> under enormous pressure rather than some > plan he concocted for an end> that doesn't even matter to him. Magpie: Nobody's telling you you can't have empathy for Harry. Though I still don't think you're describing Harry's attitude in the book at all (I do think that of course his destiny is a big thing for him, but he doesn't bring it into every situation and I don't know that it's quite as real to him as you're making it), I certainly don't have a problem with empathizing with Harry. The trouble is that at times you seem to be--to me--crossing the line from empathy for Harry into saying Harry can't be wrong because you empathize with him. I guess that's also why I don't understand the distinction you make between this and Carol's analogy. She, too, gave an example of a teenager overwhelmed by life and so not caring about school. It seems like you're saying that the difference here isn't that Harry doesn't have that attitude, but in Harry's case the teacher should agree with him because facing your own death is an appropriate reason for plagiarizing when facing your gramma's death isn't. And I just don't see that it works that way. It's not that I don't understand that attitude. If I were dying in a week yes, I don't think I'd care about my grades in school (perhaps not enough to give myself a secret I have to worry about getting out to the teacher I'm fooling). But as I said to Steve, not being overly harsh in my judgment of Harry here is not the same as saying that Harry can't be described as doing anything unflattering here because he's got a lot to deal with. It seems like we start out arguing that Harry isn't doing anything wrong, and then it switches to "but can't you understand why he's doing something wrong?" And those are two different things. It's like trying to argue that Hermione wasn't doing anything out of order when she Confunded McLaggen and when people say yes she is flipping over into saying "but can't you empathize with a teenaged girl watching the boy she likes being humiliated?" as if that's the same issue. Mike: IOW, what comes across as Harry's oppurtunistic cheating to some, comes across as an apathy towards correcting Slughorn to others. Harry has never seeked out praise, Harry doesn't particularly like Slughorn, Harry is aware of Slughorn's collecting talent motif, and Harry doesn't particularly care what Slughorn thinks of him. Magpie: Whether it's apathy or opportunistic teaching doesn't change what Harry's doing, though. Mike: Why did we miss this? Here we all are trying to defend Harry's use of the book, while Harry isn't. Why isn't Harry? Maybe because Harry doesn't feel a need to. Maybe because Harry just thinks of the book's potions brilliance as relieving him of one more nuisance, namely studying for potions work. Harry does have a twinge of conscience after he wins the Felix, but after that he simply wants Hermione to stop with the nagging. He defends the "Prince" with regards to his dodginess, but not himself for using the book. That's what Valky is trying expkain to us. Magpie: Yup, that's my question too--what's with the defending? See, I don't think it is what Valky is explaining. To me, it sounds like he's doing what Harry isn't (which is what it seems like others are doing when they're saying Harry is experimenting or acting like an A-student or getting tutoring)--they're trying to make Harry's reputation as an exceptional student somehow more real (while also arguing that he shouldn't have to be anyway). That's the same flip I was trying to describe above. I don't think less of Harry for doing something cunning and tricking his way into better grades in class. I actually think I would think less of him if I thought he was claiming this really does make him an A-student better than others, or that every time he did it it was for a higher cause. That sounds like the "Saint Potter" Malfoy talks about. Betsy: Though, to be honest, Harry knows what he's doing is a form of cheating and lying. It's why he doesn't verbally share the Prince's notes with Ron (to avoid Slughorn's catching on), and it's why he doesn't relish the "potion's genius" title. It's all of his listie parents who keep twisting things into a "not *my* son" direction. Magpie: Shares the . That's the Harry I see as well. -m From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 03:56:18 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 03:56:18 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating/ Harry's thoughts processes in HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165406 > >>Alla: > Oh, I totally see that Harry that Valky describes, absolutely. Now > granted he worries about other things well, but I guess I would > totally put his thoughts about Prophecy and his mission as > occupying him a lot. > > Harry sounds plenty angsty here to me, and this seems to me as one > of the important points in the book, which again does not say to me > that cheating is right or something, just that academics may indeed > not be the most important thing on Harry's mind, that's all. Betsy Hp: To be finicky, I wouldn't call him angsty in that scene I snipped, more resolved. But while I'm not saying Harry in HBP is *not* thinking about taking down Voldemort, I do take issue with the idea that this is *all* Harry thinks about, that *everything* else falls by the way side. Because it doesn't. Harry doesn't resent being captain of the quidditch team. He doesn't resent the classes he's taking. A big reason for this is because Harry knows Dumbledore is on the case. As far as Harry is concerned he's got a big burden, but Dumbledore is there to help him. So Harry is still able to go to school, while *Dumbledore* flits about neglecting his normal duties. The end of HBP changes everything of course. But we're talking about behavior *before* Dumbledore's death. Betsy Hp From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 04:18:58 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 04:18:58 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165407 > Carol responds: > This is just a small aside. I'm not sure that Teen!Snape is practicing > killing flies in the sense of practicing killing people. There's no > green flash, for one thing. He could simply be Stunning them. Or, > since no light at all is mentioned (Stupefy give off a red light), > maybe he's using a spell especially designed for flies. zgirnius: Well, I think Snape's minor memories are a fun topic for speculation, so I'll toss in my two cents as well. Flies are small and fast moving targets - I always thought Snape might be working on his reflexes. (Sort of like in the movie 'Karate Kid', when the sensei is practicing trying to catch a fly with a pair of chopsticks). And since there is no mention of light, yes, I agree he was not using the Killing Curse here, but some hex or jinx which might or might not kill a fly. Carol: > And BTW, I don't think, as some posters do, that the memory of the boy > Severus on a bucking broom being watched by a laughing girl indicates > that he's not good at flying. zgirnius: Here I disagree. I think he was bad at flying when first introduced to it, and has never grown to like it (I don't think timidity is the only way one can fail to fly well immediately). I also believe, though, that he was grimly determined to achieve competence in this area, and did whatever it took to do so. I like the idea that there's some skill valued in the wizarding world that he was not a natural at. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sun Feb 25 04:43:39 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 04:43:39 -0000 Subject: FILK: Saving People Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165408 Saving People (OOP, Chap. 32) To the tune of Save the People from Stephen Schwarz' Godspell Here's a very well-sung performance on You-Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRPOdsNEOmU Dedicated to Ginger THE SCENE: An empty classroom, First Floor Corridor. Having received a vision of Sirius captured by Voldemort, HARRY goes into rescue mode. HERMIONE: I've just got to say this - HARRY: What? HERMIONE: You this isn't a criticism, Harry! But you do sort of I mean - don't you think you've got a bit of a - a - saving-people thing!' HARRY (donning a Superman shirt): My thing is saving people The women and the men That evil Dark Lord creep-o Is after us again! Powers of the Dark Have plots to spring And none can halt their vile king But Harry's rage, because my thing Is saving people. Shall I stand here forever Debating Herm and Ron, When it is my Godfather Tortured by Voldy's wand? No, say these portents No, say my dreams Snake eyes shall not in triumph gleam Once more I go, so it would seem, To save more people! HERMIONE & RON: Thy thing is saving people! No matter where or when Grim Reaper, you'll not keep them, When Harry has this yen! Out saving people That's what you do Thy vision yet may prove untrue But saving people You're beaucoup For saving people Enter GINNY & LUNA GINNY & LUNA He's saving the people! HERMIONE & RON: You're saving people GINNY & LUNA You're saving the people! HARRY: I'm saving people! GINNY & LUNA You're saving the people! ALL: My/Thy thing is saving people! And now I do/he does intend The awful Dark Lord topple So here we go again! Out saving people That's what I/you do Let us access some Umbridge Floo For saving people I'm/You're beaucoup For saving people For saving people I'm/You're saving people Out saving people! Out saving people! Out saving people! (etc) - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From sherriola at earthlink.net Sun Feb 25 04:53:29 2007 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 20:53:29 -0800 Subject: harry cheating? a different view In-Reply-To: <014401c75890$2df0f710$2e8c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165409 Betsy: Though, to be honest, Harry knows what he's doing is a form of cheating and lying. It's why he doesn't verbally share the Prince's notes with Ron (to avoid Slughorn's catching on), and it's why he doesn't relish the "potion's genius" title. It's all of his listie parents who keep twisting things into a "not *my* son" direction. Magpie: Shares the . That's the Harry I see as well. Sherry now: When I read HBP and all the potions lessons with the prince's book, I wasn't thinking about cheating, lying or anything like that. I was thinking about what a bad effect the book had on him, seeming to change his character. I'm not really interested in the morality part of whether he was cheating and lying or not. It seemed to me--and long before I knew who was the half blood prince--that the book was very dangerous and seemed to enchant Harry in a way, causing him to think and act in ways we'd never seen from him before. Learning the identity of the Prince didn't change my mind. In fact, that book, and its effect on Harry and the knowledge of the person who created those spells and potions was more evidence for me that Snape was not a good guy. So, I never thought about the so-called ethics of Harry using the prince's book in terms of academics. I only thought that he was behaving strangely and I wished the book would disappear. If Harry was cheating by using it to do his potions work, for me, that's another piece of evidence that the book was a very bad influence in his life and not the friend Harry thought it to be. This is not about defending Harry and saying he can do no wrong, this is about my first instinctive reaction to the book and all that Harry did in relation to it. Much as I disliked Snape, before knowing he was the HBP, I was upset Harry didn't give him the book after the bathroom scene. Not because I cared that he lied to Snape--teenagers lie to teachers--but because I wanted someone in authority to take the book away and break its hold on Harry. Sherry From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 06:09:26 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 06:09:26 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165410 Carol: > > Carol, who gets shivers just thinking of Snow's hypothesis zgirnius: Well, the idea that the green potion, alone or its combination with the lake water applied externally, is enough to slowly change a person into an Inferius would certsainly give an interesting new meaning to Snape's expression of revulsion just before he killed Dumbledore. I tend to think not, though, because of Snape's seemingly great anguish over the killing. This theory would make it more of a rescue. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Feb 25 10:00:08 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 10:00:08 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: <014401c75890$2df0f710$2e8c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165411 Magpie: I don't see that it really matters whether an academic advantage is foremost in Harry's mind when he does it. It seems like you're whole argument is that things like academic honesty are petty when you're a guy like Harry who's got the weight of the world on his shoulders. And that's a possible position, **but these things being "petty" in Harry's eyes doesn't mean Harry's not taking the easy way over the right way in his Potions class sixth year.** Valky: My position is that it does. Magpie: Maybe in your view he's owed this bit of easy because the rest of his life is so right, but that's different than it being right because Harry's life is hard. Valky: > Do you mean '.. owed... because the rest of his life is so **hard**'.. please accept my apology if I'm mistaken, I'm assuming that's what you meant and *right* is a typo. < No that's not it.. LOL ;) It's right because it's right. Mike helped to clarify this position a little, I believe, by pointing out Harry using the HBP notes in his effort to soften Slughorn up for information, that is a helpful point to this position. The way I see it is this. The argument Carol made was - using the book to gain an academic advantage over other students and a reputation he didn't deserve is choosing easy over right. And my response is - Yes, it is. And Harry wasn't using the book to get an academic advantage over other students or a reputation he does deserve. As has been repeated in this thread many times, he offers no defense to that at all. Harry uses the book initially because its all he's got in the classroom, he has to use it and in some cases te notes are clearer than the original text; he uses it later because its interesting and like Steve noted, because the book is more friendly and open with him than he believes the adults around him are, but seemingly as wise as them. And later he uses the reputation he has earned through it as an advantage in the cause of his mission to defeat Voldemort, as Mike noted; beyond that he has become unhealthily attached to the book and this is not a good thing, but something I have empathy for... and then beyond this he furthers his use of the book to.. apply a tip from it to save his best friends life, apply a spell from it in his defense in a battle which he later regrets deeply. Not one of these things is what you would call a willful decision to gain an unfair **academic reputation**. He is feeling guilty about that sometimes, he's caught up in that sometimes, sometimes it even causes him to be compared to is mother which must have been nice to feel. But overall, he is not purposefully going for a big letter E on a NEWT he barely expects to ever see, that's not his purpose at all, so how in any way can choosing an easy path to that end apply to his situation ? It's not even his life. I am saying IF getting an E in potions was the point to which Harry was striving in using the book, THEN it applies that he is choosing the Easy rather than the Right way to do it. My position is, he's not. Magpie: We're saying when he pretends to be something he isn't and takes credit for things he didn't do, he's pretending to be something that he's not and taking credit for things he didn't do. Valky: This is not how I had read the post I initially was answering, but I see what you're saying and how it is relevent. In this, I guess, most simply I see 'credit' as a loaded word, it's just academic credit. The word credit has positive connotations, but to the Harry Potter of sixteen years old, that *Academic* credit is the currency of kids with "Normal" lives. Its the positive connotations that don't apply to him, not so much the rules of attainment. He offers no defense for having it, and he knows it's not rightfully his, but that doesn't wipe out the fact that no matter how much he has it's ultimately a useless attainment, he doesn't really intend to use the academic credit for anything. Betsy Hp: Hmm... See, I think especially as Harry takes on The Forces of Evil (tm) he actually needs to watch the slippery slope of "I'm so good normal rules of decent behavior need not apply". We've already had the Barty Crouch warning on that. And the Umbridge one for that matter. Though, to be honest, Harry knows what he's doing is a form of cheating and lying. It's why he doesn't verbally share the Prince's notes with Ron (to avoid Slughorn's catching on), and it's why he doesn't relish the "potion's genius" title. It's all of his listie parents who keep twisting things into a "not *my* son" direction. Valky: LOL Betsy is that like Snape's "listie" girlfriends saying Not my Snapey Pooooo! Ahh it's okay, that's our empathy with the characters, they are something else, no doubt :) And I'm flattered that you recognise my maternalist dynamic with Harry's character, it's fine with me. I *would* give him a slap for losing his better judgement to this Potions text, of course. But I'd also try to understand his relationship with it correctly, or else I'd be just shouting at the wind "You cheated to one up Hermione and Draco in potions!!" and I'd be wrong. I agree its a slippery slope, and I totally agree that Harry did slip on it to his detriment and he knew that when he saw Draco bleeding to death on the bathroom floor. In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165378 Valky: Pleasing Slughorn in class would surely seem like a petty and unimportant goal, while the option of having the onus to do that off your back while you concentrate on other things that you feel are vital.. wouldn't that seem the right path ? This is in conjunction with what Steve said: In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165380 Steve/bboyminn: While Harry certainly sees Slughorn as far more benevolent than Snape, he none the less sees Slughorn for what he is, and he is not pleased. Slughorn wants him for a trophy, Slughorn sucks up to him because Harry is famous, and that is exactly the type of person Harry has made a constant effort to avoid. Mike: IOW, what comes across as Harry's oppurtunistic cheating to some, comes across as an apathy towards correcting Slughorn to others. Harry has never seeked out praise, Harry doesn't particularly like Slughorn, Harry is aware of Slughorn's collecting talent motif, and Harry doesn't particularly care what Slughorn thinks of him. Valky: Thanks for your post Mike, yes I think we are on a similar wavelength here. It's funny you should mention reading these two paragraphs of mine and Steve's in conjunction because I was actually thinking the same thing when reading Steves post, myself. :P and firther to this - Betsy wrote: Yes, Harry does think and worry about his Voldemort mission, but not to the exclusion of everything else. And I (Valky) reply: I agree Betsy, not "to the exclusion of all else". But *with* greatly diminished interest and enthusiasm for *else*. Apathy, I think, is a fairly appropriate term, and its a kind of judgemental apathy, like with Sluggy. It's almost a clearheaded apathy, a sense of putting his energy into a winning battle, as opposed to anything that ultimately has no seeming reason. A 'la the very thing at the heart of this debate - Academic acheivement. One last note, I actually feel I should correct myself on the post I made to Carol, where I used the analogy of a dying person, I implied that the person was in total existentialist depression and compared it to Harry, which, as Betsy rightly pointed out, isn't really the case. Yes Harry is angst ridden about his fate, but not all the time, of course. Sometimes he's holding out hope that he will win and will live, and more often than not, working towards that is what's on his mind rather than looking to the sadness of his impending doom. So to say, the analogy is more like a girl who says to her teacher - " I was told I have three months to live, I'm dying now and nothing can change that... except, there may be a way for me to look to a brighter future, doing the essay to perfection doesn't look like it will help that right now and I'm sorry I don't care how its done and I have no defense in that regard I'll probably die anyway and it won't matter, however, there are reasons to stay and get the essay of my back that just might save my life. So I offer no apologies for that, I'm doing it. " Or something in that general area... From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Feb 25 15:29:40 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:29:40 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165412 > > Valky: > > This is not how I had read the post I initially was answering, but I > see what you're saying and how it is relevent. > > In this, I guess, most simply I see 'credit' as a loaded word, it's > just academic credit. The word credit has positive connotations, but > to the Harry Potter of sixteen years old, that *Academic* credit is > the currency of kids with "Normal" lives. Its the positive > connotations that don't apply to him, not so much the rules of > attainment. He offers no defense for having it, and he knows it's not > rightfully his, but that doesn't wipe out the fact that no matter how > much he has it's ultimately a useless attainment, he doesn't really > intend to use the academic credit for anything. > Pippin: Academic credit and academic responsibility aren't as important as saving the world -- until they are. Do you want your kids' meds prepared by somebody who faked their way through Chemistry the way Harry is faking his way through advanced Potions? Somebody who's just pretending they know about side effects and interactions, or how to prescribe antidotes? Harry *did* intend to use that academic credit for something. He wanted to be an Auror, and Aurors are required to have a NEWT in potions. Harry thought at first that becoming an Auror would help him against Voldemort. By the end of the book he had realized that probably wasn't true. But his knowledge at the end of the book doesn't apply to his motive at the beginning. If Harry had felt that way in the first place he would never have signed up for NEWT potions at all. The mature, honest, fair and productive thing to do would have been to drop the course if he thought he didn't need it, or if he did, to admit that he had a weakness in the subject and could use some help beyond the Prince's notes. I'm sure Slughorn would have been delighted to help. He could have explained *why * the recipes were better and Harry would have benefitted far beyond the praise he received for his so-called genius. But that would have been the hard way, because Harry doesn't respect Slughorn and wouldn't have liked feeling indebted to him. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Feb 25 15:56:12 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:56:12 -0000 Subject: Hermione and the HBP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165413 I've been thinking about Hermione's stubborn refusal to use the Prince's notes and I think I've discovered a reason for it beyond blind submission to authority. I think she was trying very hard to keep her nose clean. She has made two powerful enemies: Umbridge and Skeeter, neither one of whom would shed a tear if Hermione's wand was snapped and she got sent to Azkaban. I think it scared her to see how easy it was for the Ministry to arrest Harry. Harry got off, thanks to Dumbledore's intervention, but Dumbledore couldn't help everyone. Stan Shunpike stayed in jail. Dumbledore was getting stretched thin, and if she thought about the battle he fought with Voldemort at the Ministry, she knew his days were numbered. I think she would have loved to analyze the Prince's work, but risking her future for academic success wasn't worth it. I think she was afraid that if she examined the potions hints too closely she'd never be able to resist the temptation to use them. Pippin From elfundeb at gmail.com Sun Feb 25 17:18:52 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 12:18:52 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0702250918r5a49a4b2tf8a38992ecb674b6@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165414 colebiancardi: which actually brings up a good point. If DD was killed immediately when Snape AK'd him, then DD would have been flung off the tower & hit the ground with such speed & force that DD's body would be flat as a pancake with lots of blood, guts and gore splattered everywhere. So, based on that, I still believe that Snape released DD from whatever was killing him (for me, it is the cursed ring that did it) and DD controlled his own fall because he was still alive, although very weak and dying. I believe DD died after he reached the bottom of the tower. Debbie: I believe Snape killed DD with an AK. When Snape arrived on the Tower, he took in the situation, he must have realized that he needed to kill DD to fulfill the UV. For DD to have died from some other means, saving Snape from having to carry out the UV, would IMO seriously detract from the pathos of DDM!Snape; it's just a deus ex machina. In any event, even if DD was already dying because of the potion in the cave, I don't see how Snape could have known that. As for the It does not matter whether he used an Unforgivable Curse or simply blasted him off the tower; either method would tear Snape's soul. Now that I've absorbed the forensics lessons, I think I have an explanation for DD's condition on the ground that is consistent with the AK. After the AK, to preserve DD's body, Snape may have executed a nonverbal spell (perhaps at the moment that DD seemed to hang suspended in the air) that allowed the body to fall slowly over the battlements and to the ground far below. This would have placed him on the ground at an odd angle, but without trauma. DD himself used this spell when the Dementor attacked Harry on the Quidditch field in PoA. If DD had been alive when he reached the bottom of the Tower, I doubt his arms and legs would have remained at such a strange angle. And while Harry wipes a trickle of blood from DD's mouth, canon does not state that the blood was fresh. A thick enough trickle might not have been fully dry. As for the inconsistencies between the various AKs that JKR describes, I don't find them significant. Substantively, it does not matter whether he used an Unforgivable Curse or simply blasted him off the tower; either method would tear Snape's soul. Debbie who recently saw The Departed and is sure Martin Scorcese would argue that DD wasn't bloody enough to have fallen from the Tower without the assistance of a slow-motion spell [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sun Feb 25 17:52:42 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:52:42 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound (was: On lying and cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165415 "jennifer" wrote: > I feel that he [Harry] should have at > least showed it [the book] to Professor > Dumbledore or Professor Slughorn I wouldn't have even been tempted to return that potions book, even if I thought it was wrong to use it (and I don't) I still would have used it, And when push came to shove I don't believe many real life flesh and blood human beings would be saintly enough to act much differently. But for the sake of argument let's assume I'm wrong and it was immoral; was it worse than murder? There has been far far more criticism of Harry over this than there has been criticism of Snape for murdering Dumbledore, and that's what I meant about Snape getting a free pass. Eggplant From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Feb 25 17:59:52 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 25 Feb 2007 17:59:52 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 2/25/2007, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1172426393.942.28570.m43@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165416 Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday February 25, 2007 1:00 pm - 1:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Location: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Notes: Just a reminder, Sunday chat starts in about one hour. To get to the HPfGU room follow this link: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Create a user name for yourself, whatever you want to be called. Enter the password: hpfguchat Click "Join Chat" on the lower right. Chat start times: 11 am Pacific US 12 noon Mountain US 1 pm Central US 2 pm Eastern US 7 pm UK All Rights Reserved Copyright 2007 Yahoo! Inc. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sun Feb 25 18:09:11 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 18:09:11 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165417 com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Do you want your kids' meds prepared by somebody > who faked their way through Chemistry the way > Harry is faking his way through advanced Potions? I don't recall Harry doing any faking, his potions worked. But to answer your question, I would MUCH rather drink a potion prepared by someone familiar with Snape's instruction than from someone who only knew the idiotic standard textbook methods. Eggplant From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 18:41:30 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 18:41:30 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165418 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Pippin: > Harry *did* intend to use that academic credit for something. > He wanted to be an Auror, and Aurors are required to have > a NEWT in potions. Harry thought at first that becoming > an Auror would help him against Voldemort. By the end of the > book he had realized that probably wasn't true. But > his knowledge at the end of the book doesn't apply to his motive > at the beginning. If Harry had felt that way in the first place > he would never have signed up for NEWT potions at all. "He felt just one tiny twinge of regret.... This was the end of his ambition to become an Auror." "Wouldn't he be living up to the prophesy, and giving himself the best chance of survival, if he joined those highly trained wizards whose job it was to find and kill Voldemort?" Mike: How important is becoming an Auror to Harry? "...one tiny twinge of regret" is how his feelings are described. Sure, he goes on to justify why, even though it was a DE in disguise that first gave him the idea, the idea had taken hold with him. But he still couches it, like you said Pippin, in terms of defeating Voldemort. He seems to be rationalizing this choice to himself while at the same time not terribly upset that he won't be able to pursue it. It's more like, 'Ah well, can't be an Auror... What's for lunch?' Not like, '*Now* what am I going to do?' I propose that even from the beginning, Harry looked at the Auror ambition as just the most logical of careers. And *only* in the context of how to defeat Voldemort. Because, the defeat of Voldemort is the be-all if not *quite* the end-all of Harry's ambitions from the start of HBP. As he told Dumbledore in the Weasley's broomshed, he's not gonna stop living, life's too short. But he immediately followed that with his determination to rid the world of Voldemort and as many DEs as he can. Harry didn't have a plan until Dumbledore gave him one in the broomshed. Now he's going back to Hogwarts to get training from Dumbledore to defeat Voldemort. That's his plan now. And Auror training has fallen by the wayside. It's only after getting to Hogwarts he finds that he can continue on the Auror path. But he wasn't terribly upset before, when he thought he wouldn't be able to. > > Pippin: > Academic credit and academic responsibility aren't as important as > saving the world -- until they are. Do you want your kids' meds > prepared by somebody who faked their way through > Chemistry the way Harry is faking his way through advanced Potions? > > Somebody who's just pretending they know about side effects and > interactions, or how to prescribe antidotes? Mike: How about this analogy: Would you want George Washington to lead your Continental Army if you knew that in his only real wartime command he blew it, lost control of the situation and led his men into a trap? Harry isn't in training to become a Chemist (Pharmacist to us in the colonies ;-)). He's in training to fight Voldemort and defeat him. He's the lead samurai, even more singularly important to the mission than GW was to the Revolution. And George didn't do so bad. It's not that your point is invalid, Pippin. On the contrary, there is a moral learning experience in the context of school, and Harry has fallen short, like you said. Valky and I aren't saying you and others are wrong. You're not! What we're trying to say is that Harry is more or less ignoring this aspect. That there is a more pressing need on his plate. Does this excuse him? Are we trying to make excuses *for* him? I don't think we are. We are just trying to read his motivation, see things as we think Harry is seeing them. And we think that Harry doesn't put much interest into how Slughorn perceives him nor whether he has unfairly gained his reputation. He just doesn't care. Should he? Maybe,... yes,... and then again, why? Oh, and once again, please don't think I or anyone wants to stifle the moralistic debate. We're simply bringing up another aspect, not overwriting the others. > Pippin: > The mature, honest, fair and productive thing to do would have > been to drop the course if he thought he didn't need it, or > if he did, to admit that he had a weakness in the subject and > could use some help beyond the Prince's notes. Mike: This is more of an aside; Harry didn't do so bad before he got the book. I'd have put him in the middle of the pack. And I bet he was destined to do better with Slughorn than he did with Snape, even without the book. But Harry is really going to all his classes and playing Quidditch to fill the time between DD's lessons. Also, he gets involved with the whole Draco thing. Still, school in it's entirety comes second to him. But what else is he going to do while he's there? Why *not* try to learn some more stuff? That doesn't mean he's that concerned with his grades, only with what will help him. This does *not* excuse him from acting honestly in the classes he chooses to attend. > Pippin: > I'm sure Slughorn would have been delighted to help. He could > have explained *why * the recipes were better and Harry would > have benefitted far beyond the praise he received for his > so-called genius. Mike: No argument here. :-) I'd like to add that I felt the same way about the book that Sherry did, and I suppose Hermione did in a way, shortly after Harry got it. Couldn't help but feel that history was repeating a la the diary, but coming from a different direction. Mike From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Feb 25 19:09:52 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 14:09:52 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] On the trivial and the profound (was: On lying and cheating) References: Message-ID: <007f01c75910$89accae0$ac66400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165420 eggplant: > I wouldn't have even been tempted to return that potions book, even if > I thought it was wrong to use it (and I don't) I still would have used > it, And when push came to shove I don't believe many real life flesh > and blood human beings would be saintly enough to act much > differently. But for the sake of argument let's assume I'm wrong and > it was immoral; was it worse than murder? There has been far far more > criticism of Harry over this than there has been criticism of Snape > for murdering Dumbledore, and that's what I meant about Snape getting > a free pass. Magpie: Interesting comparison and I definitely see where you're coming from, but I'd make a different analogy. The trouble with Snape's murder of Dumbledore is canon itself obviously sets it up as a mystery. We don't yet know exactly what or why he was doing it, and the possibility is open that Snape was DDM the whole time. So I don't think arguing for DDM (and so not exactly murder) is giving Snape a free pass, that's a valid plot issue. Peter Pettigrew is a murderer for sure, and I don't think anybody considers him better than Harry because Harry was dodgy in class. What I would compare it to is Snape doing things that are "lesser evils" and seem to be about his own short-term pleasure or ease. For instance, picking on Harry in class or being impatient with Neville. That is the sort of thing where yes, I have seen Snape defended in the way Harry is being defended here, where he's not picking on Harry and Neville, he's trying to teach them for their own good or whatever. That, to me, is the equivalent of looking at Harry giving himself a secret advantage in class and saying, "Oh no, it's like he's just studying hard on the side. Or he's not really at an advantage at all." That, to me, is a similar thing and I don't buy either of them. And then there's the third issue, which seems to be that if you call it a bad thing you're being mean to Harry or claiming you yourself are holier than thou, which I don't think is true. My own view that Harry is giving himself an advantage is not at all based on my being "saintly" or thinking I would never do such a thing. It's knowing I would and having no illusions that I wasn't being scrupulously fair or honest in doing it. Regarding Snape, I think my position is pretty consistent with Harry's here. I don't see anything good in his picking on Harry and Neville. I think he's picking what is pleasurable over what is right. But I still think Snape is on the good side and perhaps one of the more valuable good guys. Same with Harry. eggplant: I don't recall Harry doing any faking, his potions worked. But to answer your question, I would MUCH rather drink a potion prepared by someone familiar with Snape's instruction than from someone who only knew the idiotic standard textbook methods. Magpie: All the more reason for the instructions to not be hoarded by Harry for his own advantage.:-) Magpie: I don't see that it really matters whether an academic advantage is foremost in Harry's mind when he does it. It seems like you're whole argument is that things like academic honesty are petty when you're a guy like Harry who's got the weight of the world on his shoulders. And that's a possible position, **but these things being "petty" in Harry's eyes doesn't mean Harry's not taking the easy way over the right way in his Potions class sixth year.** Valky: My position is that it does. Magpie: And I don't understand that position. Let's try a different analogy. I'm running to get help for someone choking to death. I jay walk across the street to get to the doctor more quickly. I don't think anybody would say I was doing a bad thing there. But of course I'm taking the easy way instead of the 'right' way according to a law that says I'm not supposed to jaywalk. I might not be doing anything wrong--in fact, doing "right" there would be wrong in the larger sense, but I see no reason to say to myself that I wasn't really not crossing at the corner. On the contrary, I'd own that I was taking the easy way. The next day, if I were going back to the doctor to get medicine for the person, I'd cross at the corner even though I was still going to the doctor to help someone else. Not that that analogy completely fits Harry, since his taking the easy way in Potions is not like my crossing the street in the middle. But to me it still seems like Harry's basically choosing easy in one area of his life. Magpie: Maybe in your view he's owed this bit of easy because the restof his life is so right, but that's different than it being right because Harry's life is hard. Valky: > Do you mean '.. owed... because the rest of his life is so **hard**'.. > please accept my apology if I'm mistaken, I'm assuming that's what you > meant and *right* is a typo. < No that's not it.. LOL ;) It's right because it's right. Mike helped to clarify this position a little, I believe, by pointing out Harry using the HBP notes in his effort to soften Slughorn up for information, that is a helpful point to this position. Magpie: I think I chose right meaning right, actually, because that seemed more what you were saying. And I still disagree with the way you're seeing Harry. Harry often acts in HBP in a way that goes against softening Slughorn up. If he needs to soften him up he might have considered playing up to him--but he doesn't, because he doesn't want to. Occasionally he does use the Prince's notes to help him smooth things with Slughorn when he needs something, just as occasionally he encourages Slughorn to talk to him about Lily--but not always. And again, this is not about Harry *using* the Prince's notes. Using them is fine. It's the dishonesty in the way he presents himself and giving himself a secret advantage over other students that makes the other students see him as "cheating." This is not particularly necessary for getting the memory from Slugorn. When it comes to doing that Harry picks and chooses what he is *willing* to do, and it's not like Slughorn's good regard for Harry rests on his Potions genius. So while sure, there are times when Harry uses the Prince's book in his quest to get the memory from Slughorn, I don't see it as his guiding motivation in keeping the book. He likes having the book, he likes the advantage it gives him. When the choice comes between keeping the book in general and using it to give himself a good rep in Potions, he of course chooses the former, because that's what he really wants, and doing so well in Potions isn't all that necessary. It doesn't even change his standing in the class, since it will take more than bad Potions to make Slughorn consider Harry less than his favorite student. Valky: The way I see it is this. The argument Carol made was - using the book to gain an academic advantage over other students and a reputation he didn't deserve is choosing easy over right. And my response is - Yes, it is. Magpie: So that's great, we agree. Valky: And Harry wasn't using the book to get an academic advantage over other students or a reputation he does deserve. As has been repeated in this thread many times, he offers no defense to that at all. Magpie: But some of his defenders on the list do, and that's when we argue about it it. Harry himself does not defend himself by claiming he's not getting an academic advantage over other students or a reputation he doesn't deserve. He is getting those things. Valky: Harry uses the book initially because its all he's got in the classroom, he has to use it and in some cases the notes are clearer than the original text; he uses it later because its interesting and like Steve noted, because the book is more friendly and open with him than he believes the adults around him are, but seemingly as wise as them. And later he uses the reputation he has earned through it as an advantage in the cause of his mission to defeat Voldemort, as Mike noted; beyond that he has become unhealthily attached to the book and this is not a good thing, but something I have empathy for... and then beyond this he furthers his use of the book to.. apply a tip from it to save his best friends life, apply a spell from it in his defense in a battle which he later regrets deeply. Magpie: But regardless of the sympathetic reasons our young scamp has to want to use the book, he's giving himself a reputation he hasn't earned and an advantage over other students. I actually found Sherry's post on this subject really interesting and relevent here: Sherry: When I read HBP and all the potions lessons with the prince's book, I wasn't thinking about cheating, lying or anything like that. I was thinking about what a bad effect the book had on him, seeming to change his character. I'm not really interested in the morality part of whether he was cheating and lying or not. It seemed to me--and long before I knew who was the half blood prince--that the book was very dangerous and seemed to enchant Harry in a way, causing him to think and act in ways we'd never seen from him before. Learning the identity of the Prince didn't change my mind. In fact, that book, and its effect on Harry and the knowledge of the person who created those spells and potions was more evidence for me that Snape was not a good guy. So, I never thought about the so-called ethics of Harry using the prince's book in terms of academics. I only thought that he was behaving strangely and I wished the book would disappear. If Harry was cheating by using it to do his potions work, for me, that's another piece of evidence that the book was a very bad influence in his life and not the friend Harry thought it to be. This is not about defending Harry and saying he can do no wrong, this is about my first instinctive reaction to the book and all that Harry did in relation to it. Much as I disliked Snape, before knowing he was the HBP, I was upset Harry didn't give him the book after the bathroom scene. Not because I cared that he lied to Snape--teenagers lie to teachers--but because I wanted someone in authority to take the book away and break its hold on Harry. Magpie: I think she's describing something very true in the story--not that the book has a hold on Harry in terms of possession or anything, imo, but that the book *is* bringing out something knew in Harry. I think Sherry is picking up on something different in Harry that the book has a hand in bringing out. In previous books it's hard not to see the kid who's the subject of Slughorn's shameless favoritism while other kids are hilariously not and who goes along with it happily being held up as somebody Harry defined himself against all the way. Valky again: Not one of these things is what you would call a willful decision to gain an unfair **academic reputation**. He is feeling guilty about that sometimes, he's caught up in that sometimes, sometimes it even causes him to be compared to is mother which must have been nice to feel. But overall, he is not purposefully going for a big letter E on a NEWT he barely expects to ever see, that's not his purpose at all, so how in any way can choosing an easy path to that end apply to his situation ? It's not even his life. Magpie: I don't think Harry's such an innocent that even he would believe that he's not willfully deciding to gain an unearned repuatation in the moments he accepts Slughorn's praise for just that. It may not have been his reason for doing it, but once it happens he knows that's what's going on. I don't have the book in front of me, but I don't recall a pressing need for Harry to pull the bezoar trick. He could have just struggled along with everyone else. I certainly understand why he decided to use the Prince's joke, but I don't think he doesn't know the other kids probably thought him a real stinker at the end of class--just as he himself would have done had he watched another teacher's pet do it. (That goes back, I think, to Sherry's being disturbed at Harry's behavior when he's using the book.) But whether or not his goal is to get himself a rep as a Potions genius he knows perfectly well he is giving himself an easier path in his Potions class than he'd have if all things were equal. Even if, as you say, his reason is that he thinks he's dying and will never see his NEWTS. Valky: I am saying IF getting an E in potions was the point to which Harry was striving in using the book, THEN it applies that he is choosing the Easy rather than the Right way to do it. My position is, he's not. Magpie: Right, and I'm saying that the fact that it's not his goal doesn't change what he's doing. It seems odd to me to suggest that the only possible way one can be choosing easy over right is if your goal begins and ends with the circumstances in which you're making things easy. I suspect far more evils are committed by people with bigger goals in mind that make them think the little things don't matter. Think, for instance, of a kid who gets someone to take the SATs for him not because he wants to give himself an academic advantage but because his parents pressure him to go to a certain level of college he can't get into on his own, and he'll be unfairly punished otherwise. He might not want to go to an Ivy League college for himself at all--perhaps he'd rather go to some other college and going to Harvard would make him miserable. One might feel totally sympathetic to him. But he's still given himself an academic advantage even if that wasn't something he wanted for himself. Valky: This is not how I had read the post I initially was answering, but I see what you're saying and how it is relevent. In this, I guess, most simply I see 'credit' as a loaded word, it's just academic credit. The word credit has positive connotations, but to the Harry Potter of sixteen years old, that *Academic* credit is the currency of kids with "Normal" lives. Its the positive connotations that don't apply to him, not so much the rules of attainment. He offers no defense for having it, and he knows it's not rightfully his, but that doesn't wipe out the fact that no matter how much he has it's ultimately a useless attainment, he doesn't really intend to use the academic credit for anything. Magpie: I would say that "credit" in this sense is perhaps more than just Academic in terms of grades, but regardless taking credit for something you don't deserve has, in the past, been an important issue in canon. As schoolkids it's one of the things the characters tend to focus on in others, respecting those who can put their money where their mouth is and suspecting those who get a free ride in any way. Whether or not it's going to matter in the long run that sixth year that one teacher thought Harry Potter was a lot more of a natural at his subject than he really was--and I agree it really might not matter in the long run at all--Harry is still being a fake about it. Even if one doesn't think it's a big deal, that's still what he's doing. He doesn't become not a fake because it doesn't matter. I think Harry has often been resented by others for the very impression that he's above "normal" kids. As to whether he's going to use his academic attainment in anything, well, he's going to use it for the same things other kids are--he's going to take his NEWTS and become an Auror. Whatever Harry thinks is going to happen to him, I don't believe he's going to die. He's going to wind up having a normal life just like everyone else. Of course, when it comes to NEWTS he might be forced to compete on an even field anyway, at which point if he's faked his way through class he'll be the one paying for it anyway. So he may not reap longterm benefits from it. At that point he may be seeing the benefit of choosing right over easy even in something as petty as your schoolwork. Valky: LOL Betsy is that like Snape's "listie" girlfriends saying Not my Snapey Pooooo! Ahh it's okay, that's our empathy with the characters, they are something else, no doubt :) And I'm flattered that you recognise my maternalist dynamic with Harry's character, it's fine with me. I *would* give him a slap for losing his better judgement to this Potions text, of course. But I'd also try to understand his relationship with it correctly, or else I'd be just shouting at the wind "You cheated to one up Hermione and Draco in potions!!" and I'd be wrong. Magpie: Yup, I think it often is like Snape's girlfriends doing that (though they wouldn't be calling him Snapey-poo, which immediately gives them a leg up in my book!). But by the same token, if you were called in by the school and told your kid was doing this and said, "But he's not doing it to one-up Hermione and Draco-that's just a pleasant side effect!" other people might not see how that was relevent. And I (Valky) reply: I agree Betsy, not "to the exclusion of all else". But *with* greatly diminished interest and enthusiasm for *else*. Apathy, I think, is a fairly appropriate term, and its a kind of judgemental apathy, like with Sluggy. It's almost a clearheaded apathy, a sense of putting his energy into a winning battle, as opposed to anything that ultimately has no seeming reason. A 'la the very thing at the heart of this debate - Academic acheivement. Magpie: I'm really not seeing much of his apathy here. I'm also not seeing his battle with Voldemort always making sense as his main motivation. I would say there are places where the point is actually clearing made that Harry's not always got that clear in his head at all. It just doesn't fit Harry's behavior throughout the year. To me it seems as off as claiming that Harry's passion for Ginny is his guiding motivation, or his grief over Sirius. Both of those things are there in the text in their places, but I don't think they work as the overall main motivation for Harry in all aspects of his life. After all, isn't one of the themes of Dumbledore's lessons with Harry that Harry *isn't* seeing it this way? Isn't that why Dumbledore gets impatient with him at times? And I don't remember Harry thinking to himself, "How can Dumbledore think I'm not totally focused on this--I'm giving myself a fake reputation in Potions for completely this purpose!" Valky: So to say, the analogy is more like a girl who says to her teacher - " I was told I have three months to live, I'm dying now and nothing can change that... except, there may be a way for me to look to a brighter future, doing the essay to perfection doesn't look like it will help that right now and I'm sorry I don't care how its done and I have no defense in that regard I'll probably die anyway and it won't matter, however, there are reasons to stay and get the essay of my back that just might save my life. So I offer no apologies for that, I'm doing it. " Magpie: And the teacher might say that's great. You can pretend to be a student and I'll pretend to give you a grade--your real grade on the material will not become an A because you don't care. The other thing that makes me a little more curious about the position as well is that sometimes the same people who say this is a petty thing and it doesn't matter *also* sometimes argue Harry into a position that's a little less Goofus and a little more Gallant. (For people not familiar with them, Goofus and Gallant were characters in a kids' magazine who were always contrasted in their behavior. Where Goofus would leave his bed unmade, Gallant would always make his bed when he got up. While Goofus ran around making noise, Gallant was considerate of others etc.) I completely understand the position that Harry is doing a wrong thing here, but that doesn't make him unredeemably wrong.Certainly he does have more important things in his life than his Potions work.I don't think he should be judged soley on whether or not he's a scrupulously honest student in class. But I also don't think that means he can't be judged as a not scrupulously honest student in class. -m From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 18:41:06 2007 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (jennifer) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 18:41:06 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound (was: On lying and cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165421 "jennifer" wrote: > > > I feel that he [Harry] should have at > > least showed it [the book] to Professor > > Dumbledore or Professor Slughorn Eggplant: > I wouldn't have even been tempted to return that potions book, > even if I thought it was wrong to use it (and I don't) I still would > have used it, And when push came to shove I don't believe many real > life flesh and blood human beings would be saintly enough to act > much differently. But for the sake of argument let's assume I'm > wrong and it was immoral; was it worse than murder? There has been > far far more criticism of Harry over this than there has been > criticism of Snape for murdering Dumbledore, and that's what I meant > about Snape getting a free pass. Jennifer: I am not saying that I am looking at the use of the book in a more psycological point of view. In my studies I use the DSM IV to make a profile. Up to this point Harry has been honest with Dumbledore so why not now? Imo Harry was scared of what the ramifications would be. They were he would have to return the book, tell Professor Slughorn about the book, and confess to Professor Snape where he got the spell from. Harry hid the book when questioned about it but I think Snape knew and that is why he punished Harry so severely for using the spells in it, especially sectumsempra in the bathroom scene. The reason Snape knew where Harry got the spell is because he invented it and Snape was a master of legilemincy so he would automatically know that Harry was lying bout where he learned it. Jennifer From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Feb 25 19:29:06 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 19:29:06 -0000 Subject: Snape, Pettigrew and life debts (Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165422 Jen: (Bringing an old thread back because I meant to post and didn't get around to it.) I'm interested to see if JKR does more comparison/contrast with Snape and Pettigrew in DH, her two characters with a foot in both worlds. In particular I could see her contrasting the two as a way for Harry to learn more about Snape because in Harry's eyes at the moment, both betrayed his parents equally and both went on to serve Voldemort. How the two deal/dealt with their respective life debts might shed some light, especially if Snape risked his life to save the Potters to make up for his actions and Harry contrasts that with PP, who not only betrayed supposedly close friends but actively helped LV kill Harry in spite of the debt. I'm growing to like the life debt being the reason for Snape's *initial* decision to turn to Dumbledore rather than his love or affection for Lily. The one reason Lily never quite fits for me is this type of attachment has never been part of Snape's character. Being motivated by duty, rules, what he considers right--yes. Motivated by love or friendship--not yet. In fact, that's been one of the major ways JKR has contrasted him with the Marauders and the Trio so far: depicting him as a loner, a man who keeps to himself, someone practically immune to what others think about him, etc. The debt would still only be an origination point for Snape's turn rather than the whole story in my opinion, the match lighting the flame. Hearing the Potters were being targeted would have been a jolt to him, realizing he was violating the 'rules' of the life debt, then taking that a little futher to consider the path he was on and whether he wanted to follow Voldemort. Maybe like Regulus that moment was when he realized 'how far Voldemort was willing to go' and realized he wanted out. The change of heart and remorse would follow for a truly loyal Snape, as opposed to one only interested in fulfilling his life debt. Jen R. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 19:40:12 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 19:40:12 -0000 Subject: Killing Snape (was Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165423 Betsy Hp wrote: > I'm not talking about penance at all, because I'm assuming that Snape's actions on the Tower were taken on the orders of Dumbledore (implied if not implicit). If Snape *did* murder Dumbledore, he did so because Dumbledore told him to do so. > > Just as the gothic maiden was raped by the villain and didn't *choose* to serve his evil lusts, Snape murdered because of another's will. However, based on the moral rules of the tale, just as the maiden's stolen virtue will never be restored in this life, Snape will never be clean until he dies. So in killing them, the author is actually being merciful. > > Do I *like* that view point? No. But it's a familiar trope and one I think JKR would play. Murder is a massively big deal in Potterverse. The good guys aren't supposed to do it. And if a good guy is forced to do it, to become so unclean, I'm betting only death would cleanse him. Carol responds: I understand what you're saying, and I agree that if Snape is doing what DD wants him to do, he's already redeemed. (I think he's being set up for forgiveness, not redemption, though that may not be the way he views it himself, given the intensity of his mental anguish in "Flight of the Prince.") But with regard to the supposed necessity for his death to cleanse him, I, too, hope that you're wrong. Just because it's a familiar trope doesn't mean that JKR will use it, and we need to remember that she's a Christian. "Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us, and lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil." There is no God or Christ per se in the WW (except in terms of secularized Christian holidays and Christmas carols and minor oats like "good Lord"), but forgiveness and mercy are still valued by the wise, personified by Dumbledore. DDM!Snape has been trying all these years to atone for the sin of revealing the Prophecy to Voldemort, which led to the deaths of the Potters, deaths that he evidently tried futilely to prevent by telling Dumbledore of LV's plan to kill the Potters (and Longbottoms?) and revealing that a spy close to the Potters (obviously he thought the spy was Sirius Black) was revealing information on the Potters (and other Order members?) to Voldemort. And since Harry entered Hogwarts, Snape has been trying to protect him, at the same time hating him or, at least, resenting his rule-breaking and "arrogance" (in part his own creation--in my experience, you get the behavior you expect from people, especially kids, at least, to some degree). Without question, the plot requires some sort of confrontation between Harry and Snape, and IMO, Harry has to forget revenge and forgive Snape as a step toward defeating Voldemort through Love. But Snape is probably the only person aside from Bill Weasley who can help Harry with Horcruxes and the only one who can help him locate them. There are plenty of ways in which Snape can redeem himself in his own and Harry's sight if Harry can only learn to understand who Snape really is, what he has been doing all along, and why he killed Dumbledore (if indeed the AK and not the poison killed him). If JKR can accomplish that, she can certainly find a way for Snape to survive. If God can forgive the sin of murder in the Christian religion (and perhaps others I'm unfamiliar with), then Harry can forgive Snape and Snape can forgive himself--and live a productive life after being forgiven. As for the WW, with Madam Bones dead, it may be difficult for Snape to find justice, but again, JKR can find a way, such as a few years in Azkaban, followed by some community service at St. Mungo's, and a quiet early retirement writing Potions and DADA textbooks under an assumed name. Or just follow eighteenth-century tradition and ship him out to the "Colonies," preferably the U.S. ;-) BetsyHp: > Death as a definitive "the end"? JKR has an epilogue planned, so I don't think she needs to kill characters just to end their story. A retirement to the south of France would serve the same purpose. Carol: Exactly. For Snape as well as Harry. It's only the British WW that's out for Snape's skin, AFAWK. Why not go somewhere where he won't be recongized? Or better yet, isn't Durmstrang in need of a headmaster? Betsy Hp: > I honestly don't see that death is enough of a price for redemption. It actually strikes me as a fairly cheap way to go. (I'm betting on > that sort of cheap end for Pettigrew for that reason.) Since I'm DDM!Snape I think Snape has been walking the (long and painful) road of redemption since the opening chapter of PS/SS. So I don't see Snape's death as necessary for redemptive reasons. Carol: Exactly. Lots of characters have died who don't deserve to die, starting with Cedric (or the Potters, if you want to go that far back). And others have died unredeemed, notably Karkaroff. (He only switched sides to get himself out of Azkaban. He remains a coward to the end, in marked contrast to Snape, who is risking his life in one way or another from the time he turns to Dumbledore onward.) > Betsy Hp: > This is, of course, an area we'll *never* see eye to eye (you [Lupinlore] say abuser, I say strict teacher ). None of Snape's actions during Harry's time at school strike me as needing something as intense as redemption. I'm not expecting (nor would I want) a squeaky clean Snape at the end of the series. > > However, if circumstances conspired to force Snape into a position where he had to murder on that Tower, if it really was an AK that Snape threw at Dumbledore, then I do think Snape is tainted with something only death will cleanse. As per the rules of JKR's world, anyway. Carol: I agree with your first paragraph but disagree with the second. Granted, there's no atonement through the sacrifice of Christ in the HP books, but why not atonement through genuine contrition and self-sacrifice? Snape has already lost everything--job, reputation, freedom, mentor. Why have him lose his life, too, just to send him on the Next Great Adventure? Mad-Eye Moody has killed, too, apparently (Evan Rosier, certainly, and perhaps Wilkes, who is also dead), and yet we don't see him atoning for these necessary killings. In fact, I see no evidence to support your idea that "only death will cleanse" a the soul of a sinner, especially, a *repentant* soul. Not even death will cleanse Barty Jr., whose soul is lost forever. Possibly a similar fate is in store for Bellatrix, and just plain death, repentant or otherwise, for Wormtail after saving Harry to repay the life debt. But death for Snape for doing what Dumbledore wanted him to do, saving Draco and Harry and getting the DEs out of Hogwarts and (presumably) helping to bring Voldemort down? I can't see JKR doing that any more than I can see her killing off Harry. As for a Boromir-style redemptive death, we have a prime candidate in Percy Weasley. Carol, who thinks that JKR either planned from the beginning to have her "gift of a character" survive and live a productive life or couldn't bear to kill him off and granted him a reprieve From lealess at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 20:18:48 2007 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 20:18:48 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165424 > > Valky: > > > > In this, I guess, most simply I see 'credit' as a loaded word, > > it's just academic credit. The word credit has positive > > connotations, but to the Harry Potter of sixteen years old, that > > *Academic* credit isthe currency of kids with "Normal" lives. Its > > the positive connotations that don't apply to him, not so much the > > rules of attainment. He offers no defense for having it, and he > > knows it's not rightfully his, but that doesn't wipe out the fact > > that no matter how much he has it's ultimately a useless > > attainment, he doesn't really intend to use the academic credit > > for anything. > > Pippin: > Academic credit and academic responsibility aren't as important as > saving the world -- until they are. Do you want your kids' meds > prepared by somebody who faked their way through > Chemistry the way Harry is faking his way through advanced Potions? > > Somebody who's just pretending they know about side effects and > interactions, or how to prescribe antidotes? > Medicine is an excellent analogy. Here is another: Let's say your dad is President of the United States, and all your life, you have been pretty sure you'd be President one day, too. This is something your family seems destined to do. Being President is a lofty goal! It requires self-sacrifice to public service and tons of responsibility for many lives. So you're facing that future: why not avail of every advantage you can now? You're going to be a world leader. You are not the brightest student, but you get into great classes where your family history is well-known. Once in class, you always have friends to help you out with homework. Later on, friends will cover your errors in judgment, pulling strings to make sure you don't get detained by the authorities when you might have deserved it. Sometimes they set you up in even better situations. You're a "normal" boy, so you like sports and lead a team -- but that doesn't turn out so well, because your attention's on other things. You get into scrapes. Still, you have special friends who smooth your path. You even get into cool secret clubs. You're going to be President one day and held to a higher standard, so you deserve to party now. You almost never have to think for yourself! It's wonderful. And what is the end result of all this? You fulfill your destiny and lead the free world, of course! But you never read a newspaper or listen to anyone who disagrees with you anymore, because that's just too unpleasant. Once you choose a course of action, you are completely unable to alter it, because you know you're always right. You lead your people into war that is a legacy of your father's era. You refuse to publicly acknowledge those who have died in that war, even if their deaths might touch you personally. You reach for unforgivable means such as torture to destroy those you see as your enemy. You cannot possibly see how any of this might be considered wrong, or how you could be held accountable, because you are the Chosen One. That is merit enough. And so on, and so forth. The point being, taking the easy road is not likely to lead to strength of character in the end, nor will it lead to acquisition of the skills that one needs to do a good job. It might lead to calcified thought processes, to further dissembling, to too much reliance on others to help with decision-making. But some will argue that the ends justify the means. I would argue that the means shape the ends. Harry flat-out lies many times, and when he is caught, he never seems to integrate an understanding that he might be doing something wrong into his personality in such a way that he ends up telling the truth the next time. His lies graduate from the trivial, a trip to Hogsmeade, to the consequential, the source of information on a murderous spell. In allowing Slughorn to believe he is a Potions prodigy, he is lying, to his own disadvantage. If this lie falls to the trivial side of the scale, it is still part of a continuum, one that will leave him unprepared for being an Auror, let alone facing Voldemort. I don't think Harry accepts credit for the Prince's Potions innovations because he feels his unique fate places him apart from others. He does it because it is an easy course of action, one that comes naturally to him. I can see where an insecure family background would lead to lying. More importantly, he has a role model for this: Dumbledore, who encourages him to lie to Umbridge (when, ironically, he hadn't been), and who takes the fall for the D.A. so Harry doesn't have to... all because of Harry's future role, which Harry doesn't even fully know about at the time. Harry mostly knew he'd been in some terrible situations, and overcame them by luck or having good friends. At the end of HBP, however, Harry feels quite privileged, enough to complain about a detention given for lying, of all things. Harry's learning to take advantage of his status as much as he is ever angsting over it. He's played Slughorn; now he has Scrimgeour trying to secure the Chosen One's influence. He can brush off McGonagall's questions. Harry is Dumbledore's man through and through, whatever that means, but is Harry prepared to lead a fight when he lies to himself, refusing to acknowledge his role in the deaths of Sirius Black and, perhaps, Dumbledore? lealess From finessefluteecole at gmail.com Sun Feb 25 19:43:14 2007 From: finessefluteecole at gmail.com (Joshua Michael) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 11:43:14 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape, Pettigrew and life debts (Re: The Continuing Tragedy of Severus...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <99ca58c40702251143n4e772c28j67b50487b57f020d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165425 Well Jen, It does make sense. I don't believe Pettigrew will kill Lupin - But I do think L & P will both die. I also think Harry may die in this next book. -- Sincerely, JOSHUA R.B. MICHAEL The RCMFluter http://www.freewebs.com/rcmfluter ______________________P_____________________ ()_( O )_____]_o_o_O_O_O_O_O_O_O_O_]d_O_O_O_) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Sun Feb 25 20:56:41 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 20:56:41 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165426 Valky: > Harry uses the book initially because its all > he's got in the classroom, he has to use it and > in some cases te notes are clearer than the > original text; he uses it later because its > interesting and like Steve noted, because the > book is more friendly and open with him than > he believes the adults around him are, but > seemingly as wise as them. > Not one of these things is what you would call > a willful decision to gain an unfair **academic > reputation**. [...] so how in any way can choosing > an easy path to that end apply to his situation ? houyhnhnm: Exactly. Harry used the book initially because it was all he had. He used the Prince's suggestion for chopping sopophorous beans because the Prince's glosses obscured the text. I agree entirely with this description of Harry's moral trajectory. Following the Prince's annotations won him the Felix and he didn't say anything about using a different technique because, at that point, well, who would. Little by little, over the course of the school year, each tiny lie of omission gots him in a little deeper until finally, he had gained for himself a reputation for brilliance and originality in potions that was wholly undeserved. Harry never chose to cheat, but isn't that the very essence of the Easy Path--not choosing. I don't think that what Harry did was academic cheating in the strictest sense, nor do think that he set out to gain a reputation for originality in potions that he didn't deserve, but that is where he ended up. He ended up in a dishonest place. I don't think that most people who end up in a moral quagmire choose it as a destination. Rather at each point along the way it is easier to remain silent, to ignore the still, small voice, and to keep sliding down the Easy Path. That's the most important lesson Harry needs to learn from the Half Blood Prince. Valky: > And later he uses the reputation he has earned > through it as an advantage in the cause of his > mission to defeat Voldemort, as Mike noted; houyhnhnm: I don't see this at all. Slughorn was fascinated with Harry before the two of them ever met. Why else would Dumbledore have used Harry as a lure to get Slughorn to come back to Hogwarts. Harry needn't even have taken potions to have had an in with Slughorn. Here is what perplexes me, though. In spite of being in the Slug Club as the result of being the famous Harry Potter, in spite, even, of his reputation as a potions genius, Harry had no success obtaining the memory from Slughorn until he drank the Felix Felicis which he won quite by accident, courtesy of the Half Blood Prince. What does one make of the moral here? From shamyn at pacbell.net Sun Feb 25 20:43:00 2007 From: shamyn at pacbell.net (Draeconin) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 12:43:00 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face. In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0702250918r5a49a4b2tf8a38992ecb674b6@mail.gmail.com> References: <80f25c3a0702250918r5a49a4b2tf8a38992ecb674b6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45E1F4D4.7050708@pacbell.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165427 > colebiancardi: > which actually brings up a good point. If DD was > killed immediately when Snape AK'd him, then DD would have been flung > off the tower & hit the ground with such speed & force that DD's body > would be flat as a pancake with lots of blood, guts and gore splattered > everywhere. Actually, no. There would have been broken bones, and the fall itself would have killed him if he weren't already dead, but the human body is pretty resilient. But the AK is supposed to be instantaneous. And the being 'flung back' by the AK? Nope. In every other case where the effects of the spell is shown, the victim simply slumps down, dead. Sounds to me like JKR didn't care about the discrepancy, and was just going for dramatic effect. Draeconin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 21:31:22 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 21:31:22 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165428 Carol earlier: > > Harry's acidental Protego just deflected the Legilimens spell that Snape was using onto Snape because Harry didn't want Snape to see anything related to Cho--which, as you say, was not a humiliating memory, just one he didn't want Snape to see. That in itself is proof that Snape wasn't casting a spell to extract humiliating memories. The same is true for Harry's memory of Petrified!Hermione--not a happy memory, but not humiliating. > > > > Pippin: > I think you're confusing two episodes here. Harry's memory of > Cho wasn't shielded by protego, it was shielded by an involuntary > stinging hex. The protego comes later, when Snape has just > been extracting memories of Harry's humilations in primary school. > > But surely legilimens is specific, how else could Snape pull out > just the memory of that book which Harry was so desperate to hide? > You can't tell me *that* was random. Carol: Mea culpa. But my point is that the Legilimens spell used in the Occlumency lessons extracts random memories. That's very different from the wandless Occlumency involving eye contact that you're referring to here. In HBP, Snape is using wandless Legilimency to prove to himself (and to Harry?) that Harry is lying about the source of the Sectumsempar spell. Snape expects to see the image of his own NEWT Potions book and that's exactly what he sees--because it's at the forefront of Harry's mind and is what he's trying, futilely, to hide. The memories extracted by the Legilimency spell in the Occlumency lessons are very different. Harry has forgotten that he even had some of those memories. They're anywhere but at the forefront of his mind. And when the Protego strikes Snape, extracting some of his memories, the same thing happens. They're random memories from his childhood, not specific memories that he's thinking about or hiding because they're humiliating or unhappy. (I don't think Snape has any memories that *aren't* unhappy, except maybe the results of his OWLs and NEWTs, which I imagine would have satisfied even his standard of perfection.) IOW, you can't compare wordless Legilimency, which Snape, Voldemort, and possibly Dumbledore chiefly use to detect a lie (or possibly the thought or emotion that's uppermost in someone's mind) with the Legilimency *spell*, which extracts random memories (not necessarily humiliating): Dudley's new bicycle, the bulldog chasing Harry up a tree, the Sorting Hat, Hermione in the hospital wing, the Dementors, Cho (OoP Am. ed. 534); the dragon, his parents in the Mirror of Erised, dead Cedric (535); Uncle Vernon hammering the letterbox closed, the Dementors again, the MoM passageway leading to his hearing, which he suddenly recognizes as the passageway in his dreams (536). All of these memories are from "the back of [Harry's] mind [which] was no longer the secure place it had once been" (590) thanks to the Legilimens spell, not from "the forefront of Harry's mind," where Snape finds his own Potions book in HBP. Harry is finding it more difficult to "disentangle separate memories from the tangle of images and sound that snape kept calling forth," but the next group includes both Dudley forcing Harry to stand in the toilet and the memory of Harry's dream of LV Crucioing Avery ("How do that man and that room come to be inside your head, Potter?"). At that point, Snape resorts to the other kind of Legilimency, the wandless kind, looking for a specific thought or memory: "Snape's dark eyes bored into Harry's. Remembering what Snape had said about eye contact being crucial to Legilimency, Harry looked away" (590). So when Snape is looking for something specific, he uses standard Legilimency. When he only wants to let loose a torrent of memories to force Harry to defend himself using whatever spell comes to mind, or, preferably, blocking them with his mind as he blocked Fake!Moody's Imperius Curse, he uses the Legilimens spell. Carol, thanking Pippin for forcing her to cite canon instead of relying on the HBP's notes, erm, her own errant memory > From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 22:09:02 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 22:09:02 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165430 colebiancardi wrote: > > If DD was killed immediately when Snape AK'd him, then DD would have been flung off the tower & hit the ground with such speed & force that DD's body would be flat as a pancake with lots of blood, guts and gore splattered everywhere. > Draeconin responded: > Actually, no. There would have been broken bones, and the fall itself would have killed him if he weren't already dead, but the human body is pretty resilient. But the AK is supposed to be instantaneous. And the being 'flung back' by the AK? Nope. In every other case where the effects of the spell is shown, the victim simply slumps down, dead. > Sounds to me like JKR didn't care about the discrepancy, and was just going for dramatic effect. Carol responds: Or we're supposed to note the discrepancy and consider it significant. This AK is as different as it can possibly be from the memorable one in the graveyard where Harry hears a rushing sound and sees the "blinding flash" even with his eyes closed (and Cedric simply falls back dead with open eyes and a surprised expression). I don't think there's a single point of correspondence between the two except the words "Avada Kedavra" and the color green. (Other spells, as I've noted, can shoot out a "jet" of green light; no other that we know of causes a "blinding flash" of green light.) For that reason, I think we should at least consider the possibility that Snape's AK is a cover for some other (nonverbal) spell and not a mere inconsistency on the part of JKR, who has been hitting the reader with *blinding* flashes of green light since SS/PS chapter 2 (page 29 of the U.S. edition) and who is unlikely to forget the properties she has assigned to the darkest of the Unforgiveable Curses. And all the other AK victims have died with open eyes. Could DD possibly have closed his eyes and composed himself for death even before Snape pulled out his wand? If that's the case, we can only conclude that Dumbledore wanted Snape, and only Snape, to kill him. Either that or the spell wasn't an AK. But it's also important that this AK--or some other spell performed by Snape nonverbally--blasts DD's body over the battlements, where it then floats like a rag doll and then comes, apparently, to a soft landing (DD's glasses are still unbroken and there's no indication of gore or broken bones) though the sprawled limbs (the rag doll again?) indicate that DD was already dead when he hit the ground. Surely DD himself could not have cast that spell, wandless as he was. It must have been Snape. Think what would have happened if Snape hadn't done that, or if any other Death Eater had performed the AK, landing DD on his back on the tower floor instead of getting him off the tower. Fenrir Greyback would have rushed forward to have Dumbledore for "afters," Harry would have been unfrozen and rushed out to fight the DEs, and mayhem would have ensued. Snape would not have been able to snatch up Draco and order the DEs off the tower. He would have had to protect both Harry and Draco. Chances are that all three (Snape, Draco, and Harry) would have died and Dumbledore would have died for nothing. It was crucial to get DD's body off the tower, and my sense is that Snape did it by casting a nonverbal spell, before or after he spoke the words "Avada Kedavra." Getting DD off the tower couldn't save Dumbledore, but IMO it enabled Snape to save himself and the two boys as Dumbledore wanted. Carol, who brilliantly forgot to sign the original version of this post From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Feb 25 22:25:49 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 22:25:49 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165431 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Harry *did* intend to use that academic credit for something. He > wanted to be an Auror, and Aurors are required to have > a NEWT in potions. Harry thought at first that becoming > an Auror would help him against Voldemort. By the end of the > book he had realized that probably wasn't true. Geoff: Mike touched on this in a way when he quoted from HBP: "He felt just one tiny twinge of regret.... This was the end of his ambition to become an Auror." (HBP "An Excess of Phlegm" p.102 UK edition) ...and then posed the question "How important is becoming an Auror to Harry? " I believe that this twinge merely underlined and confirmed something which had become evident to him previously: "Perhaps the reason he wanted to be alone was because he had felt isolated from everybody since his talk with Dumbledore. An invisible barrier separated him from the rest of the world. He was - he had always been - a marked man. It was just that he had never really understood what that meant ... ...It was sunny and the grounds around him were full of laughing people and even though he felt as distant from them as though he belonged to a different race, it was still very hard to believe as he sat here that his life must include, or end in, murder..." (OOTP "The Second War Begins" p.754 UK edition) My feeling is that Harry's attitude towards school and work is completely - and possibly subconsciously - coloured by this and by his feelings about Sirius. Other events - his concerns about Draco and his peregrinations with Dumbledore - are making demands on his time and I join with others who sense that his heart is not fully in his classes although he may still be seeking a little one upmanship over Hermione and also enjoying the lack of confrontation in Potions. But seeking academic credit to be an Auror? I have my doubts. I think the episode by the lake marked the beginning of a sea-change in his view of his life. From Ronin_47 at comcast.net Sun Feb 25 22:10:29 2007 From: Ronin_47 at comcast.net (Ronin_47) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:10:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face. In-Reply-To: <45E1F4D4.7050708@pacbell.net> References: <80f25c3a0702250918r5a49a4b2tf8a38992ecb674b6@mail.gmail.com> <45E1F4D4.7050708@pacbell.net> Message-ID: <001801c75929$c2f1b4a0$7bd02444@TheRonin> No: HPFGUIDX 165432 --Draeconin wrote-- >>> Actually, no. There would have been broken bones, and the fall itself would have killed him if he weren't already dead, but the human body is pretty resilient. But the AK is supposed to be instantaneous. And the being 'flung back' by the AK? Nope. In every other case where the effects of the spell is shown, the victim simply slumps down, dead. Sounds to me like JKR didn't care about the discrepancy, and was just going for dramatic effect. <<< --Ronin's Comments-- Actually, the fall itself wouldn't necessarily kill him. It's quite possible, given his age and weakened state. But as you mentioned, the human body is very resilient. Last week in the news, a young pregnant woman was sky diving. Her parachute failed and her back-up also failed. Her fianc? was video taping the entire jump as she plummeted helplessly to earth. She landed face first on the black top of a parking lot. After needing reconstructive surgery on her entire face and parts of her neck and pelvis, not only is she alive and well, but the unborn child was also born, free of damage. It's an incredible true story of survival. And to think, they were just ordinary muggles. I believe Dumbledore was killed by the AK and that he was prepared to die. But it's always a possibility I suppose that he survived. Cheers, Ronin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Feb 25 23:58:01 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:58:01 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165434 Geoff wrote: > Mike touched on this in a way when he quoted from HBP: > "He felt just one tiny twinge of regret.... This was the end of his > ambition to become an Auror." > (HBP "An Excess of Phlegm" p.102 UK edition) > > ...and then posed the question "How important is becoming an > Auror to Harry? " > > I believe that this twinge merely underlined and confirmed > something which had become evident to him previously: > > "Perhaps the reason he wanted to be alone was because he had felt > isolated from everybody since his talk with Dumbledore. An invisible > barrier separated him from the rest of the world. He was - he had > always been - a marked man. It was just that he had never really > understood what that meant ... > > ...It was sunny and the grounds around him were full of laughing > people and even though he felt as distant from them as though he > belonged to a different race, it was still very hard to believe as he sat here that his life must include, or end in, murder..." > (OOTP "The Second War Begins" p.754 UK edition) > > My feeling is that Harry's attitude towards school and work is > completely - and possibly subconsciously - coloured by this and > by his feelings about Sirius. Other events - his concerns about Draco and his peregrinations with Dumbledore - are making demands on > his time and I join with others who sense that his heart is not fully in his classes although he may still be seeking a little one upmanship over Hermione and also enjoying the lack of confrontation in Potions. > But seeking academic credit to be an Auror? > > I have my doubts. I think the episode by the lake marked the beginning of a sea-change in his view of his life. > Carol responds: First, the Auror quote is the good old unreliable narrator again. Getting an E in Potions doesn't end Harry's chances of being an Auror; it just sets up the subplot with the HBP's textbook (a new Potions teacher who lets in E students and just happens to have two old textbooks lying around). And Harry wouldn't take advantage of the chance to take Potions with Slughorn if he and Ron didn't still want to be Aurors. He could just turn down the opportunity because he doesn't have the book and doesn't like (or need) the class. But, as Snape points out at the Christmas party, the classes Harry is taking just happen to be those required to be an Auror. Hmmm. As for the episode by the lake, Harry rather quickly puts it out of his mind. He no longer feels alone at the end of OoP. In fact, having half the Order turn out to escort him on Platform 9 3/4 *tells* him that he's not alone. By the time we see him again at the beginning of HBP, except for some residual and unresolved grief, guilt, and anger relating to Sirius Black's death that he deflects onto Snape, he's pretty much himself again. When has Harry ever really cared about his courses? He's always copied from Hermione when he had a chance, and he and Ron cheated blatantly on their Divination homework without a qualm of conscience. Now he's taking credit for work that someone else has done in Potions (only Hermione doesn't approve because this time she's not the one "helping" him by providing the improved instructions, the result of the *HBP's* creativity and research). Even when his life was in danger from the TWT, he put off practicing the necessary spells or trying to figure out the egg clue. He's always regarded Quidditch as more important than classes, and he spends a whole lot more time in HBP thinking about Quidditch (and Ginny) than about Voldemort. He even puts off getting Slughorn's memory of Tom Riddle for Dumbledore because he has non-Voldemort-related concerns. As for Harry's obsession with Draco, we're back to CoS when HRH thought that Draco was the Heir of Slytherin, only this time he's alone in suspecting that Draco is a DE. (Harry isn't worried about Voldemort himself or about his own safety. Draco isn't out to kill *him* or he'd have done more than stomp on his face in the Hogwarts Express. He's worried about what Draco and his supposed accomplice Snaoe are up to.) The only thing different about Harry in HBP from Harry in previous books is that he's acting more like James dearest by hexing people in the hallways, including the helpless Squib, Filch, whom he hits twice with Langlock, the tongue-tying hex. He also hits Crabbe with the toenail hex when, IIRC, Crabbe hasn't done anything other than exist. Like Sherry, I find Harry's behavior in HBP disturbing, but unlike her, I don't blame the book itself or its author. Harry himself is responsible for his behavior, or should I say, his choices, in HBP and always, and his choices are not very admirable in this book whether they're deliberate choices like hexing people or sins of omission like taking credit he doesn't deserve or foolish and potentially disastrous errors in judgment like using an unknown curse labeled "for enemies" on a fellow student. (I'm not saying that everything he does is wrong; it's certainly a good thing he knew what a Bezoar was when Ron was poisoned, but the credit for teaching him about Bezoars goes to HBP!Snape and Potions Master Snape. BTW, there was a Bezoar lesson in GoF as well. Snape wants those kids to learn their antidotes. Slughorn, in contrast, is a total loss when Ron is poisoned.) I'm trying to think of a single time in HBP when Harry is not with Dumbledore (before the tower) when Harry is thinking about Voldemort and the danger that he'll be facing. I can't think of a single example (though I'm sure I'll be corrected if there is one). His mind is always on something else: trying to prove that Snape and Draco are up to no good, testing out those spells, thinking about hexing McLaggen, trying to decide between Ginny and Ron (as if he actually had to make that choice), worrying about the Quidditch Cup. Situation normal for Harry Potter, who only thinks about the scar and the Prophecy and Voldemort when he has no choice and about classes when he's facing an exam or writing an essay--or faced with Golpalott's Law and no help from the HBP except a snarky joke about Bezoars. And I forgot. Harry also has to contend with girls who are trying to give him a love potion to get him to take them to Slughorn's party. Harry is a Quidditch star, after all, just like his father. And just like his father, he's obsessed with a cheeky red-haired girl, thinking about her when he's not thinking about Quidditch or hating Snape. Carol, seeing James reincarnated in HBP!Harry and not liking the picture at all From celizwh at intergate.com Mon Feb 26 00:17:45 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 00:17:45 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165435 zgirnius: > Here I disagree. I think he was bad at flying when > first introduced to it, and has never grown to like it > (I don't think timidity is the only way one can fail > to fly well immediately). I also believe, though, that > he was grimly determined to achieve competence in this > area, and did whatever it took to do so. I like the idea > that there's some skill valued in the wizarding world > that he was not a natural at. houyhnhnm: That's the way I see it. And I also like the idea that it is one more similarity between Snape and Hermione. (Actually, I can't remember ever seeing Hermione on a broom, but at least she manages to stay on her thestral.) From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 00:27:33 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 00:27:33 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165436 > >>Geoff: > > My feeling is that Harry's attitude towards school and work is > completely - and possibly subconsciously - coloured by this and > by his feelings about Sirius. Other events - his concerns about > Draco and his peregrinations with Dumbledore - are making demands > on his time and I join with others who sense that his heart is not > fully in his classes although he may still be seeking a little one > upmanship over Hermione and also enjoying the lack of confrontation > in Potions. But seeking academic credit to be an Auror? > I have my doubts. I think the episode by the lake marked the > beginning of a sea-change in his view of his life. Betsy Hp: But what does that mean? Does that make it okay for Harry to pass off someone elses work as his own because he's the Chosen One and it's a burden? Should all of Harry's teachers adopt this attitude and either not assign him homework or allow him whatever short cut Harry feels he needs? Was it a mistake for Harry to agree to be Gryffindor's quidditch captain, since he's so disconnected from school already? Are we clearing Harry from cheating and lying but tarring him with hypocrisy and selfishness? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165415 > >>Eggplant: > > There has been far far more criticism of Harry over this than there > has been criticism of Snape for murdering Dumbledore, and that's > what I meant about Snape getting a free pass. Betsy Hp: As I've said before, there have been *far* more posts on Snape's actions on the Tower than Harry's actions with his textbook. And while I've read posts where people want Snape to die because of the Tower, I haven't read anyone wanting Harry to die because of his textbook. So I'll assume you're talking about those of us who think Snape is DDM? Or question whether a murder even took place? Obviously the spectrum is fully represented, and I for one couldn't tell you who exactly thinks what. So I'll speak for myself. Did Snape behave badly on the Tower, even in a minor way? It will depend on if he actually killed Dumbledore. And even then, I see a viable reason for him to have done so, though that doesn't change the action, of course. (I'm assuming DDM. If Snape is actually ESE, then that changes everything.) On the other hand, Harry did lie (by omission, but that's still lying) about his potion knowledge. And by lying about his knowledge he did cheat. It was a minor thing. I'm not expecting JKR to kill him off because of it. But it was also a petty thing. It didn't gain anything for the war effort. Which makes it worse, IMO. Because it's just a way for Harry to slide by, rather than a choice to do a wrong thing for a real gain. Does that make sense? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165411 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Though, to be honest, Harry knows what he's doing is a form of > > cheating and lying. It's why he doesn't verbally share the > > Prince's notes with Ron (to avoid Slughorn's catching on), and > > it's why he doesn't relish the "potion's genius" title. It's all > > of his listie parents who keep twisting things into a "not *my* > > son" direction. > >>Valky: > LOL Betsy is that like Snape's "listie" girlfriends saying Not my > Snapey Pooooo! Betsy Hp: Hee! Again, I can only speak for myself, but I do like to think that I call Snape on his bad behavior. I might be more amused than outraged, or I might feel like I have a better understanding of *why* Snape is behaving badly. But I don't think I excuse it to the extent that I don't call it what it is. Though, that's just me. And of course I've seen bad Snape behavior get spun into gold. So sure, it definitely happens. I think it's probably something to try and guard against. Or at least, it's something I try to guard against. Betsy Hp From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Feb 26 00:43:14 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 00:43:14 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound (was: On lying and cheating) In-Reply-To: <007f01c75910$89accae0$ac66400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165437 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > Let's try a different analogy. I'm running to get help for someone > choking to death. I jay walk across the > street to get to the doctor more quickly. I don't think anybody > would say I was doing a bad thing there. But of course I'm taking > the easy way instead of the 'right' way according to a law that says > I'm not supposed to jaywalk. I might not be doing anything wrong--in > fact, doing "right" there would be wrong in the larger sense, but I > see no reason to say to myself that I wasn't really not crossing at > the corner. On the contrary, I'd own that I was taking the easy way. > The next day, if I were going back to the doctor to get medicine for > the person, I'd cross at the corner even though I was still going to > the doctor to help someone else. > > Not that that analogy completely fits Harry, since his taking the > easy way in Potions is not like my crossing the street in the > middle. Valky: Why isn't it? What is different about Harry's situation in your view? This looks to me like an excellent analogy of Harry's situation. 1. Potions Class is very much like a street Harry needs to cross on his way to save lives. 2. He's not crossing it according to the law of crossing streets, but in the greater context of saving the life walking up to the corner to cross wait for a green light isn't the best option. 3. He's under no delusions that he's crossing at the lights, he knows he's jaywalking. But still he chooses it because it seems well and truly the shortest and most right path to the person in need. It sounds right to me. It doesn't mean he can't be wrong about this, you can be certain that jaywalking will ensure you get to someones aid most efficiently in order to save them.. then a truck can run you over. You can be wrong, of course and that is why it is not my position here to deny that. My point is this - Harry's life is not an exercise in crossing streets anymore, it's an exercise in saving lives per the prophecy. The easy way in your analogy is not to save that persons life at all, because it's impossible to lawfully cross the street efficiently from where you stand. That's what I would call choosing easy but not necessarily right. In the greater context of the other persons life, that's pettiness. None of this is intended to argue that Harry is perfect, untainted, or what have you. As Mick was saying, I agree, this is a point of view that I felt needed to be raised when it seemed to me that the HBP cheat notes / morality debate was being nutted out extensively in a box that didn't accurately represent Harry Potter's life. ...anyhoo, I'll leave the last word to you Magpie, thanks much for sharing the floor with me :) Best always Valky From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 01:10:06 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 01:10:06 -0000 Subject: Killing Snape (was Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165438 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > If Snape *did* murder Dumbledore, he did so because Dumbledore > > told him to do so. > > Just as the gothic maiden was raped by the villain and didn't > > *choose* to serve his evil lusts, Snape murdered because of > > another's will. However, based on the moral rules of the tale, > > just as the maiden's stolen virtue will never be restored in this > > life, Snape will never be clean until he dies. So in killing > > them, the author is actually being merciful. > > Do I *like* that view point? No. But it's a familiar trope and one > > I think JKR would play. > > > >>Carol: > > But with regard to the supposed necessity for his death to cleanse > him, I, too, hope that you're wrong. Just because it's a familiar > trope doesn't mean that JKR will use it, and we need to remember > that she's a Christian. > Betsy Hp: Ah, but this is a Christian trope. A very old-fashioned one, but one none the less. So that's actually part of the reason I'm a bit worried. > >>Carol: > > If JKR can accomplish that, she can certainly find a way for Snape > to survive. If God can forgive the sin of murder in the Christian > religion (and perhaps others I'm unfamiliar with), then Harry can > forgive Snape and Snape can forgive himself--and live a productive > life after being forgiven. Betsy Hp: But it's not really about forgiveness, either. I fully expect Harry to see and understand the "true" Snape by book's end. And I'm betting that Harry's clarity will translate into clarity for the rest of the WW. (Or at least those that matter.) No, it's more about carrying around a burden, I guess. Just as the innocent maiden has had her innocence ripped from her and will forever suffer the wound, Snape will forever suffer from the knowledge that he murdered. Only death (the embrace of heaven) can end that pain. > >>Carol: > > Mad-Eye Moody has killed, too, apparently (Evan Rosier, certainly, > and perhaps Wilkes, who is also dead), and yet we don't see him > atoning for these necessary killings. In fact, I see no evidence to > support your idea that "only death will cleanse" a the soul of a > sinner, especially, a *repentant* soul. > > But death for Snape for doing what Dumbledore wanted him to > do, saving Draco and Harry and getting the DEs out of Hogwarts and > (presumably) helping to bring Voldemort down? I can't see JKR doing > that any more than I can see her killing off Harry. > Betsy Hp: Yeah... Mad-Eye is the only hope I can cling to. Unfortunately, he more killed in the line of duty (while trying really hard not to) rather than out and out murdering someone. And that there is no other good guy who's killed that we know of is part of what worries me. That JKR has created this line that can never be crossed. It's why we've had so many discussions about whether or not Dumbledore killed, and whether or not Harry will kill, I think. And then there's Snape who, if it was an actual AK, just full out murdered Dumbledore. So I do worry that JKR will see killing Snape as a move of mercy. Better him dead and blessed than alive and wounded. Betsy Hp From finessefluteecole at gmail.com Sun Feb 25 23:09:15 2007 From: finessefluteecole at gmail.com (Joshua Michael) Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:09:15 -0800 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ Blood on DD face. In-Reply-To: <001801c75929$c2f1b4a0$7bd02444@TheRonin> References: <80f25c3a0702250918r5a49a4b2tf8a38992ecb674b6@mail.gmail.com> <45E1F4D4.7050708@pacbell.net> <001801c75929$c2f1b4a0$7bd02444@TheRonin> Message-ID: <99ca58c40702251509n7f4545bxa4864b5f1958f3d2@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165440 Draeconin wrote-- > Actually, no. There would have been broken bones, and the fall > itself would have killed him if he weren't already dead, but the > human body is pretty resilient. But the AK is supposed to be > instantaneous. And the being 'flung back' by the AK? Nope. In every > other case where the effects of the spell is shown, the victim > simply slumps down, dead. Sounds to me like JKR didn't care about > the discrepancy, and was just going for dramatic effect. > --Ronin's Comments-- > I believe Dumbledore was killed by the AK and that he was prepared > to die. But it's always a possibility I suppose that he survived. Dear All, This is an intro about me and my views on this. (You can read about musical me on my site.) I am a huge HP fan - I watch the movies, have read the books too many times to remember and check Mugglenet everyday. (Got to love that site!) Oh and read mugglenet fanfic! Here are my 3 views: 1) Snape killed Dumbledore because Dumbledore asked him to. This is why Snape was arguing with him in the forest. He didn't want to kill him. My theory is this: Avada Kedavra needs hate - so Snape hated killing Dumbledore and he was able to perform the spell. JK herself has confirmed in an interview that DUMBLEDORE IS DEAD 100%. But recently she said he may make an appearance in Book 7 - maybe as a portrait. 2)Snape didn't kill Dumbledore - Because usually when Avada Kedavra is used the person just slumps down dead. We never get to SEE Dumbledore's body at his funeral. 3) Dumbledore did die - but Fawkes' song brought him to life. This would explain why Madam Pomfrey's eyes were wide when she was in hospital - She's a healer and she realized Dumbledore's re-incarnation. That's also why she didn't attend the funeral. OH AND I BELIEVE SNAPE'S a good guy :) Joshua The RCMFluter http://www.freewebs.com/rcmfluter ______________________P_____________________ ()_( O )_____]_o_o_O_O_O_O_O_O_O_O_]d_O_O_O_) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 01:51:58 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 01:51:58 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD/ HBP potions book and diary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165441 Lealess: Harry is Dumbledore's man through and through, whatever > that means, but is Harry prepared to lead a fight when he lies to > himself, refusing to acknowledge his role in the deaths of Sirius > Black and, perhaps, Dumbledore? Alla: I actually would like to ask how Dumbledore's death can even **perhaps** be Harry's fault? I am assuming that you are saying that if Dumbledore died from poison? So, that would be Dumbledore's fault then, would it not? I mean I had been reading a lot that if Dumbledore ordered Snape to kill him, that is really **not** Snape's fault, at all. Dumbledore ordered Harry, made him promise to do whatever Dumbledore asked of him. So, even if Dumbledore died from poison, how is it Harry's fault? > Betsy Hp: > Did Snape behave badly on the Tower, even in a minor way? It will > depend on if he actually killed Dumbledore. And even then, I see a > viable reason for him to have done so, though that doesn't change the > action, of course. (I'm assuming DDM. If Snape is actually ESE, > then that changes everything.) > > On the other hand, Harry did lie (by omission, but that's still > lying) about his potion knowledge. And by lying about his knowledge > he did cheat. It was a minor thing. I'm not expecting JKR to kill > him off because of it. But it was also a petty thing. It didn't > gain anything for the war effort. Which makes it worse, IMO. > Because it's just a way for Harry to slide by, rather than a choice > to do a wrong thing for a real gain. Does that make sense? > Alla: I am afraid it does not make sense for me. You are in essense saying that for you Harry using Prince potions book and passing Prince work as his own is a worse offense than killing a human being, are you not? Of course I am also talking about Snape killing Dumbledore with real AK, if Snape did not kill him, then obviously he did not do anything wrong. But we are talking about two actions , one v another, without looking at the reasons. People offered many reasons according to which Harry's offense, well seems to be quite insignificant to them and people also offered many reasons according to which Snape killing DD was justified, etc. But by itself, lying in the potions class is worse than murder? No, makes no sense to me I am afraid. > Mike: > No argument here. :-) > > I'd like to add that I felt the same way about the book that Sherry > did, and I suppose Hermione did in a way, shortly after Harry got it. > Couldn't help but feel that history was repeating a la the diary, but > coming from a different direction. Alla: Wonderful post, Mike, truly is :) I am sticking it in the middle of another post to be able to say **me too** As I mentioned in the past, I did feel the same way about the book that Sherry did, but Sherry certainly can claim that she was more objective than me in that instance, because she had no idea who HBP was and I knew it before started to read, so that could have certainly influenced my POV. But yes, absolutely, about the diary. If Arthur was so livid about one book, he would probably felt the same way about this one. Although this one did not seem to be doing interactive thinking, it still felt like it. And we also tried to figure out for the longest time what part of HBP storyline was in CoS, did we not? What if among other things JKR did plan to introduce these two books together? To compare or contrast them. Hmmmm, I wonder which one is it. Speculating of course. JMO, Alla From lealess at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 02:06:12 2007 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 02:06:12 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD/ HBP potions book and diary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165442 > Lealess: > > > > Harry is Dumbledore's man through and through, whatever > > that means, but is Harry prepared to lead a fight when he lies to > > himself, refusing to acknowledge his role in the deaths of Sirius > > Black and, perhaps, Dumbledore? > > > Alla: > > I actually would like to ask how Dumbledore's death can even > **perhaps** be Harry's fault? > > I am assuming that you are saying that if Dumbledore died from > poison? > > So, that would be Dumbledore's fault then, would it not? I mean I > had been reading a lot that if Dumbledore ordered Snape to kill him, > that is really **not** Snape's fault, at all. > > Dumbledore ordered Harry, made him promise to do whatever Dumbledore > asked of him. So, even if Dumbledore died from poison, how is it > Harry's fault? > > It is Harry's fault in the same way that Dumbledore's death is perhaps Snape's fault. Snape was no doubt bound in several ways by promises made. He fulfilled his duty. You have argued that he had another choice, however; that he could have refused to do his duty. Couldn't Harry have made the same choice, then? Couldn't he have said, "No, Headmaster, I don't want to do this anymore, feed you this liquid which is obviously causing you pain. I am making the decision to stop." But, you're right. I don't blame Harry or Snape. To the extent they may have contributed to Dumbledore's death, they were both no doubt following orders. Snape might disagree with that, if he tried to back out, if he has remorse for his part in Dumbledore's death, if he takes any responsibility for his actions. Why wouldn't he, unless he is ESE? Does Harry have those same feelings about his actions? lealess From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 02:28:51 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 02:28:51 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD/ HBP potions book and diary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165444 Re: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD/ HBP potions book and diary > > Alla: > > > > I actually would like to ask how Dumbledore's death can even > > **perhaps** be Harry's fault? >> Lealess: > It is Harry's fault in the same way that Dumbledore's death is perhaps > Snape's fault. Snape was no doubt bound in several ways by promises > made. He fulfilled his duty. You have argued that he had another > choice, however; that he could have refused to do his duty. Couldn't > Harry have made the same choice, then? Couldn't he have said, "No, > Headmaster, I don't want to do this anymore, feed you this liquid > which is obviously causing you pain. I am making the decision to stop." > Alla: Sure, if you are holding Snape responsible for taking a life, orders or no orders, I understand your position to the extent. Because Dumbledore specifically assured Harry that potion is not going to kill him, no? He said it is no health drink, but not that he was going to die from it. And of course Harry is a minor under DD command, so I do not think that he had as much choice as Snape, but as I said, those are side effects, if you saying that Snape **is** responsible as well, I do not have that much to argue with. Lealess: > But, you're right. I don't blame Harry or Snape. To the extent they > may have contributed to Dumbledore's death, they were both no doubt > following orders. Alla: Okay :) Lealess: Snape might disagree with that, if he tried to back > out, if he has remorse for his part in Dumbledore's death, if he takes > any responsibility for his actions. Why wouldn't he, unless he is > ESE? Alla: Yes, if. Lealess: Does Harry have those same feelings about his actions? Alla: We do not even know that Potion is killing the person, no? So why should Harry have the same feelings as of today? And we do know that Avada kills people. I would like to think that if we learn that potion did kill DD, Harry would have those feelings, yes. I have my doubts about Snape :) JMO, Alla From lealess at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 02:39:40 2007 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 02:39:40 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD/ HBP potions book and diary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165445 > Lealess: > Does Harry have those same feelings about his actions? > > Alla: > > We do not even know that Potion is killing the person, no? So why > should Harry have the same feelings as of today? And we do know that > Avada kills people. > > I would like to think that if we learn that potion did kill DD, > Harry would have those feelings, yes. > > I have my doubts about Snape :) > > JMO, > > Alla > I have my doubts about the Avada Kedavra spell being genuine, or being the cause of Dumbledore's death. However, we have seen and heard of Snape acting as a healer. I think he would have felt responsible and remorseful because he couldn't save Dumbledore's life, but instead had to participate in the charade of killing him. But time will tell which of us is right. And I'd like to see Harry somehow grow into an honorable person out of these experiences. Now I have papers of my own to grade ... lealess From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Feb 26 05:06:14 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 00:06:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the trivial and the profound (was: On lying and cheating) References: Message-ID: <019e01c75963$e26235f0$ac66400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165446 Magpie" wrote: >> Let's try a different analogy. I'm running to get help for someone >> choking to death. I jay walk across the >> street to get to the doctor more quickly. I don't think anybody >> would say I was doing a bad thing there. But of course I'm taking >> the easy way instead of the 'right' way according to a law that says >> I'm not supposed to jaywalk. I might not be doing anything wrong--in >> fact, doing "right" there would be wrong in the larger sense, but I >> see no reason to say to myself that I wasn't really not crossing at >> the corner. On the contrary, I'd own that I was taking the easy way. >> The next day, if I were going back to the doctor to get medicine for >> the person, I'd cross at the corner even though I was still going to >> the doctor to help someone else. >> >> Not that that analogy completely fits Harry, since his taking the >> easy way in Potions is not like my crossing the street in the >> middle. > > Valky: > Why isn't it? What is different about Harry's situation in your view? > This looks to me like an excellent analogy of Harry's situation. Magpie: Because nobody's life depends on Harry having a slightly easier experience in Potions class in sixth year. Valky:> > 1. Potions Class is very much like a street Harry needs to cross on > his way to save lives. Magpie: But how is it that? He doesn't have to take the class at all. I don't see how it would make any difference to anyone if he failed it--anyone except himself. It's not like he can't win against Voldemort if he doesn't bring with him a report card that shows him getting an A in the class. Valky: > > 2. He's not crossing it according to the law of crossing streets, but > in the greater context of saving the life walking up to the corner to > cross wait for a green light isn't the best option. Magpie: He doesn't have to cross it and nobody except himself benefits from his not crossing it according to the law. In fact to a certain extent when you're talking about a class, which is supposed to be teaching you something, taking it without really taking it is a waste of time. Just as Harry's taking Divination was pretty much a waste of time. Valky:> > 3. He's under no delusions that he's crossing at the lights, he knows > he's jaywalking. But still he chooses it because it seems well and > truly the shortest and most right path to the person in need. Magpie: I see him knowing he's jaywalking, but I don't see him seeing it as the *right* path to him as a person in need, just the shortest. What would have happened if he'd not used the Prince's bezoar trick? Nobody would have been hurt, he'd be no less able to defeat Voldemort, he wouldn't have been less able to get the memory from Slughorn. Valky: > It doesn't mean he can't be wrong about this, you can be certain that > jaywalking will ensure you get to someones aid most efficiently in > order to save them.. then a truck can run you over. You can be wrong, > of course and that is why it is not my position here to deny that. Magpie: But is there really canon that Harry sees it this way? Because while I wouldn't be surprised if occasionally he defended himself to other people with vague references to Voldemort, I don't remember ever getting the feeling that Harry connected his easy time in Potions to fighting Voldemort. It seems like even when he's talking about the Prince possibly being useful in that direction it's more about his spells. Valky: > My point is this - Harry's life is not an exercise in crossing streets > > anymore, it's an exercise in saving lives per the prophecy. The easy> way > in your analogy is not to save that persons life at all, because > it's impossible to lawfully cross the street efficiently from where> you > stand. That's what I would call choosing easy but not necessarily> right. > In the greater context of the other persons life, that's > pettiness. Magpie: And how does that analogy relate to Harry in this analogy? If he decides "not to cross the street at all" he's not any more or less close to saving anybody's life--he might just be a bit more honest, according to your description, because he'd actually be saying that since he's not interested in devoting his time to Potions he's not going to take the class. When Harry chooses not to take CoMC he doesn't seem to be choosing right or easy, because there's no conflict. Valky: > None of this is intended to argue that Harry is perfect, untainted, or > what have you. As Mick was saying, I agree, this is a point of view > that I felt needed to be raised when it seemed to me that the HBP > cheat notes / morality debate was being nutted out extensively in a > box that didn't accurately represent Harry Potter's life. Magpie: I do think part of the reason for that, though, is what Carol and Betsy have both described, that canon doesn't show us a Harry who's putting it in these terms. That Harry is happily putting "petty" concerns over Voldemort *a lot* in this book. And he's always been fairly blase about studying, like any other student. Take Ron, for instance. Ron wants to be an Auror too, but he doesn't seem to take school more seriously than Harry despite not having the threat of Voldemort hanging over his head. I thought when Pippin talked about Harry being an Auror, for instance, she wasn't claiming that previously Harry driven by a single-minded desire to be an auror. She was, I thought, that whether or not it's something that's really affecting his decisions right now, that *is* where he's going and that is what his school is therefore going to eventually be used towards. Just like when I was in eleventh grade I might not have approached all my classes with the idea of college at the forefront of my mind, but that's where it was all eventually going. Valky: > ...anyhoo, I'll leave the last word to you Magpie, thanks much for > sharing the floor with me :) Magpie: Right back atcha!:-) -m From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 05:27:30 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 05:27:30 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165447 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > zgirnius: > > I like the idea that there's some skill valued in the wizarding > > world that he (Snape) was not a natural at. > houyhnhnm: > That's the way I see it. And I also like the idea that it is one > more similarity between Snape and Hermione. (Actually, I can't > remember ever seeing Hermione on a broom, but at least she manages > to stay on her thestral.) Hermione played Quidditch with Harry, Ron and Ginny in summer, but she was "dreadful" (HBP,p.105). I agree with you both about Snape though. I see him as someone who would master every skill considered useful in WW. He despises "weakness" and would hate to appear weak and incompetent in any situation. He doesn't have a natural gift, but he seems to be hard-working and determined enough to become a decent flyer. zanooda, who intended to end her post with an example of a situation where someone needs to use a broom instead of Apparition, but couldn't think of any, probably because of the late hour... From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Feb 26 06:28:31 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 06:28:31 -0000 Subject: A Chessmaster DD Idea -- Was Re: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: <014401c75890$2df0f710$2e8c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165449 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > Because nobody's life depends on Harry having a slightly easier > experience in Potions class in sixth year. Valky: This inspires me in a new direction for HBP, it was the right question and got me thinking deeply about this aspect of what I was reading here. I first thought to answer this question with - To a certain degree the Wizard World does depend on Harry having a good cover for the activities which he is "really" engaged in with Dumbledore. And that brought two considerations to mind in consequence. 1. As you were pointing out Magpie, there is a very real context which posters such as Carol, Pippin and Betsy, are reading in to on this thread. Canon Harry in HBP doesn't always put things in the context of Voldemort/prophecy/destiny, once or twice he even neglects to focus clearly in this context and Dumbledore has to reign him in. It's Harry's life and lot that his fate is sealed and looming and he knows it, no doubt; but it is also true that he doesn't seem to have a whole and realistic grasp on that during HBP in a concious or vigilant sense. The person who does have that vigilant grasp in HBP is DD, he is the quiet voice behind Harry's ear reminding him of the context in which he's working over and over. And it occurred to me that Harry being set on this path of focussing on things that he felt so much less enthusiasm for he could almost quit without a second thought, and looking like a student who was doing well and achieving, never mind that he was basically apathetic about that aspect of his life.. then who set him on that path, was Dumbledore. And it was for a reason. Quidditch captain, pre-Auror subjects (Snape took a long note of this), Slug Club... these are all DD's achievements. By moving Snape from potions, and replacing him with Sluggy, Dumbledore achieved a lot in covert. Sluggy was instantly keen to give Harry the Slug Club honour and enabled Harry to eneter potions class and look like a boy for whom nothing had changed since fifth year, he was still in pre-Auror training as he had planned to be, and as was public knowledge courtesy of Umbridge. And of course, Slughorn's hedonist affections for Harry paid off in the confirmation of an important theory to ice the cake. Dumbledore also gave Harry the Quidditch captaincy, which is a normal and expected continuation of Harry's normal and expected life. And so here is Harry, living exactly as though nothing had changed since the prophecy was lost in the DOM, from the view outside Hogwarts it looks exactly as though Harry still knows less than Voldemort, and Harry is none the wiser because DD has orchestrated it. This leads me to think that from DD's perspective Harry must not quit schoolwork that he has chosen, but is disinterested in. If he looks to the outside world like a young man bent on new purpose or direction, too much has changed and can arouse the suspicions of Voldemort. In this way then the HBP text provides a good cover for Harry to continue looking like an average everyday student, (well not even and average and everyday student, but moreover a student whose school life is so good and rewarding and busy he couldn't possibly care about anything else), while DD secretly moulds him into an efficient weapon. I don't suppose DD orchestrated Snapes text book to be in Harry's hands; it doesn't seem right that it would be that way.. however.. If Harry is gaining a potions reputation in Sluggy's class, if he is doing it easy enough in that class that noone is the wiser to his enthusiasm learning about the Prophecy, Voldemort and the Horcruxes, why fix something not broken ? If there is a broken bit, it is the danger to Draco, from Harry, and DD has put Snape on that job.. hence the chessboard looks pretty good. Harry doesn't know he is being allowed the freedom to look like an average schoolboy any way he can think of to, but I suspect that is what is happening in HBP under Dumbledore's orchestration. 2. It also occurred to me to question wether Harry's reputation for Potions genius may even at some stage preceed him to his benefit. Whereas in HBP, I'm thinking, it was a good cover for Voldemort/Horcrux-Expert!Harry to exist covertly. It may actually turn out to be a really useful con, in DH. Potions wouldn't be the weapon of choice which you use against a Potions Master; which is good for Harry because it is definitely one of his weaker skills. For that to happen, though, depends heavily on a DD'sMan!Snape not to blow the lid off the con to Voldie.. luckily I am a DD'sMan!Snape adherent. ;) Open to your scrutiny :P Valky From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 07:19:20 2007 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:19:20 -0000 Subject: It's not about cheating... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165450 I truly believe JKR put in snape's "old"/"former" potion book to represent her upcoming book/books....and to let us know there are no true answers eithical, academic or otherwise.... the only one thing one may expound upon regarding Harry's potion book in HBP is why Hermione never asked to read it...(obvious for Hermione who wants the official version).....but ron could have read it as well...AND ron had more access to said book than anyone else besides harry, yet he chose not to read it..and, yet, no one could doubt Ron's adolescent distractions....eels, eels and more eels....(I remember fishing for them and selling them to our local chinese restaurants sad, yet very true..) Besides which, it would be great if the Lilly connection was more than green eyes in the HBP...what if she made the annotations of better yet....snape made them...copying off of her...with lily giving chance after chance...to snape...until he called her a "mudblood"...and we saw her response..... I dunno... what if Harry's Neville......Is akin to Lilly's Snape...(woohoo for neville who needs no mysetery or shadows--yet he has them in plenty...yet apparently snape needs them...--which of course he would, he's a death eater... Now, in the arena of snape.......if we are to compare Neville to Snape...to whom shall we choose...and if Lilly's snape betrayed her....shall it be Neville that betrays harry....did Dumbledore make a horrific promise long ago? anywho, this is where I'm at right now...I'm goint back to start again at book one... DD From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 06:38:56 2007 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (jennifer) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 06:38:56 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound (was: On lying and cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165452 Magpie wrote: > > Let's try a different analogy. I'm running to get help for > > someone choking to death. I jay walk across the street to get to > > the doctor more quickly. I don't think anybody would say I was > > doing a bad thing there. But of course I'm taking the easy way > > instead of the 'right' way according to a law that says I'm not > > supposed to jaywalk. > > The next day, if I were going back to the doctor to get medicine > > for the person, I'd cross at the corner even though I was still > > going to the doctor to help someone else. > > > > Not that that analogy completely fits Harry, since his taking > > the easy way in Potions is not like my crossing the street in the > > middle. Valky: > Why isn't it? What is different about Harry's situation in your > view? > This looks to me like an excellent analogy of Harry's situation. > > > My point is this - Harry's life is not an exercise in crossing > streets anymore, it's an exercise in saving lives per the prophecy. > The easy way in your analogy is not to save that persons life at > all, because it's impossible to lawfully cross the street > efficiently from where you stand. That's what I would call choosing > easy but not necessarily right. In the greater context of the other > persons life, that's pettiness. Valky, I want to take your analogy one step further and add a personal experience to it. I was taking a class in swift water rescue and the instructor threw Resusci Annie over the side of a bridge and told the class to save her. Instead of me going back a mile and half up the road which would have been safer, I jumped off the side of the bridge and saved my victim but I could have seriously been hurt. That is why I think Harry should have told someone about the book. In using the other instructions in the book he got a leg up on everyone else in the class. In OotP Harry is guilty of giving several others a leg up. Is that dishonest or was it for the greater good? Jennifer From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 14:53:09 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 14:53:09 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD/ HBP potions book and diary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165453 Alla wrote: > > We do not even know that Potion is killing the person, no? So why > should Harry have the same feelings as of today? And we do know that > Avada kills people. > > I would like to think that if we learn that potion did kill DD, > Harry would have those feelings, yes. Carol responds: While I agree with you that Harry was following Dumbledore's orders in giving DD the potion, I don't think that DD was being straightforward with him in saying that LV would want to interrogate the person who took the Horcrux. If that were the case, he'd *really* be endangering Harry because he'd be inviting LV to the cave--but there's no indication that LV even knows that RAB took the original Horcrux, much less that he knows that Harry and DD took the fake one. And note that DD says the potion won't kill *right away*, not that it won't kill at all. Harry either isn't listening or he's bound to obey Dumbledore by his given word. I forget which comes first and don't have time to check. But, in any case, the potion changes everything. It enables Draco to easily disarm a weakened Dumbledore and puts Dumbledore (seemingly) at Draco's mercy. Had DD been his normal self, he could easily have Stupefied Draco and dealt with the DEs as he dealt with Fudge and company in OoP. And Snape would have hurtled up the stairs to find that the UV had not been triggered and everything was all right. They could take Draco into hiding and Snape's cover would not have been blown. Maybe that's the outcome DD was hoping for all along when Snape thought he was taking too much for granted. At any rate, while Draco's bringing DEs into Hogwarts makes DD's death possible, Harry's makes it inevitable. That does *not* mean that DD's death is in any way Harry's fault. He was following orders against his will. But if Harry were to think about what happened in any detail, he would realize that he played a part in Dumbledore's death, just as he did in Sirius Black's. In this case, however, Snape is not merely a convenient scapegoat onto whom Harry can dump all his guilt and anger. He is, or appears to be, DD's murderer, and Harry can conveniently forget his own role. I doubt that he'll remember it unless Hermione or someone reminds him, but I could be wrong. If someone we love dies, it's natural to go through a series of "if only's." So maybe Harry will reach a point where he realizes that *if only* he hadn't given DD that potion, DD could have fought off the Death Eaters (including, Harry will believe, Snape). What he won't see until it's pointed out, and maybe not then, is a parallel between his situation and Snape's. Carol, who is just trying to see from Harry's pov and is not in any way blaming him for Dumbledore's death > From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Feb 26 17:03:30 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:03:30 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: <007f01c75910$89accae0$ac66400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165454 "Magpie" wrote: > The trouble with Snape's murder > of Dumbledore is canon itself obviously > sets it up as a mystery. We don't yet > know exactly what or why he was doing it, It's only a mystery if you insist on making it mysterious; the events on that tower were pretty straightforward. It's as if I were to say Harry had a wonderful reason for not telling the authorities about the potions book, but we readers just haven't been informed of it yet. Snape always gets a free pass, Harry and Hermione never do. > My own view that Harry is giving himself > an advantage is not at all based on my > being "saintly" or thinking I would never > do such a thing. I'd like to make 3 points: 1) Giving yourself an advantage is not a vice, it is a virtue. 2) Not only would I have done exactly the same thing that Harry did I would not feel one second of guilt about it. 3) Harry is entitled to have secrets. The teachers don't tell Harry everything and Harry has a right to return the favor. >> Me: >> I would MUCH rather drink a potion prepared >> by someone familiar with Snape's instruction >> than from someone who only knew the idiotic >> standard textbook methods. >Magpie: >All the more reason for the instructions to not > be hoarded by Harry for his own advantage People love to criticize Harry (I don't pretend to know why), if one reason for doing so gets shot down try another. If there had been a scene in one of the books of Snape in his chambers consulting a very rare old potions book I doubt we would have heard one word of criticism from anybody because Snape has that all important Free Pass, Harry has never even seen one. Eggplant From muellem at bc.edu Mon Feb 26 18:18:46 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:18:46 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165455 "eggplant107" wrote: > People love to criticize Harry (I don't pretend to know why), if one > reason for doing so gets shot down try another. If there had been a > scene in one of the books of Snape in his chambers consulting a very > rare old potions book I doubt we would have heard one word of > criticism from anybody because Snape has that all important Free Pass, > Harry has never even seen one. > colebiancardi: I guess the "criticism" is because Harry is the Hero of the Story. What is a Hero? I c&p this from http://www.geocities.com/doctorpeace/hero/whatishero.html and edited it, as this person was talking about a game ;) but it fits: A hero is someone unusual qualities, who is working for the greater good of their society, who is searching for new truths and revelations, and who has flaws that, must be overcome in order to prevail. The hero will need Allies, Followers, Contacts, and other relationships. They will take charge; act instead of react. They will need to be creative. Ok, so, I thought this was a pretty good definition of a Hero for the HP stories. Nothing new. Therefore, the criticism around the HBP book & Harry is the flaw. It isn't a big one as far as flaws go, or life threatening. However, if Harry doesn't learn from this flaw, will he pick up and run with it - i.e. continuing to repeat this character flaw over & over again, which may lead to a tragic end. The flaw is not the use of the book, but the stealing of credit. I do not have a problem with Harry using the HBP book as a reference, a tool. What I do have a problem with, and even Harry acknowledges this to himself, is that he is taking credit for SOMEONE ELSE'S HARD WORK. I cap'd that not to yell, but to stress that point. Sure, I can go to the library or ask my friend for help on a project, but would I EVER take credit for someone else's work? Would I just stand by and not correct the assumption that others have made about me? I don't view Harry as "consulting" the HBP book - he is using it, in totality, without experimentation of his own - he is using it without understanding what he is doing. Hermione goes to the library to consult and I am sure NO ONE would call her a cheater - everyone knows she goes the library and I am sure she footnotes like crazy. If Snape didn't come up with those potion refinements, didn't create those hexes & curses, but took credit for it - I would call him a liar & a cheat. I have no problem stating that. If Snape "consulted" another book to improve on a potion and understood what that improvement did and why, I have no problem with that. If Harry had used the HBP book to understand what those potion improvements did & why, I would have no problem with that either. I think what it boils down for me is this: a) Harry read the HBP's notes and used them without showing the least bit of curiosity about the why's and how's. He didn't really "learn" anything - if he did, the book could have been taken away from him and it wouldn't matter. The knowledge would be in his head. b) Harry let people assume he was brilliant in Potions. Snape knew better, Hermione knew better. He took credit for someone else's hard work and experimentations. And that is a fake, a fraud in my book. colebiancardi (who does get miffed when a co-worker takes credit for my ideas and code) From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Feb 26 18:35:42 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:35:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the trivial and the profound Message-ID: <26270519.1172514942771.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165456 From: eggplant107 >It's only a mystery if you insist on making it mysterious; the events >on that tower were pretty straightforward. It's as if I were to say >Harry had a wonderful reason for not telling the authorities about the >potions book, but we readers just haven't been informed of it yet. >Snape always gets a free pass, Harry and Hermione never do. When Dumbledore say, "Severus, please...", what is the rest of the sentence? Is it really that straightforward? Why, when the normally self-controlled Snape is running away, is he yelling instructions to Harry on what he needs to do to defeat Voldemort? Bart From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Feb 26 18:56:54 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:56:54 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165457 > "Magpie" wrote: > > > The trouble with Snape's murder > > of Dumbledore is canon itself obviously > > sets it up as a mystery. We don't yet > > know exactly what or why he was doing it, > > It's only a mystery if you insist on making it mysterious; the events > on that tower were pretty straightforward. It's as if I were to say > Harry had a wonderful reason for not telling the authorities about the > potions book, but we readers just haven't been informed of it yet. > Snape always gets a free pass, Harry and Hermione never do. Magpie: I really don't think I'm the one making it a mystery. The whole build-up to DH is pretty much based on it. It really just doesn't seem believable to me that Dumbledore, the wise old man on the good guy, was fooled by a bunch of DEs because their cynical view of people is the right one. I think the context behind those straightforwad events on the Tower have been blatantly presented as a mystery. Harry's reasons for not keeping the Potions book to himself have not been presented as a mystery. We were in his head at the time. This has nothing to do with liking Snape or giving him a free pass. It's more about reading a lot of books and having certain instincts based on how they go, and putting together lots of information throughout the series. Eggplant: > > My own view that Harry is giving himself > > an advantage is not at all based on my > > being "saintly" or thinking I would never > > do such a thing. > > I'd like to make 3 points: > > 1) Giving yourself an advantage is not a vice, it is a virtue. > > 2) Not only would I have done exactly the same thing that Harry did I > would not feel one second of guilt about it. Magpie: Yes, you've made it clear you would not feel a second of guilt about most things Harry does or you would do--and that you'd possibly consider any suggestion either of you should feel guilty offensive. But I don't know what definition of "virtue" you're working with if you think "giving yourself an advantage" qualifies. There are plenty of ways to give yourself an advantage and they're not all virtuous. One has nothing to do with the other. Working hard at something is a virtuous way of giving yourself an advantage. Hiring someone to break the legs of your competition would hardly be described so. So I'm going to have to say that giving yourself an advantage is neither a virtue or a vice. It depends on what you're doing. Eggplant: > > 3) Harry is entitled to have secrets. The teachers don't tell Harry > everything and Harry has a right to return the favor. Magpie: Sure he's entitled to have secrets. That doesn't make what he's doing not dishonest. There are lots of different kinds of secrets and ways to keep them or use them. > >> Me: > >> I would MUCH rather drink a potion prepared > >> by someone familiar with Snape's instruction > >> than from someone who only knew the idiotic > >> standard textbook methods. > > >Magpie: > >All the more reason for the instructions to not > > be hoarded by Harry for his own advantage Eggplant: > > People love to criticize Harry (I don't pretend to know why), if one > reason for doing so gets shot down try another. If there had been a > scene in one of the books of Snape in his chambers consulting a very > rare old potions book I doubt we would have heard one word of > criticism from anybody because Snape has that all important Free Pass, > Harry has never even seen one. Magpie: I don't think we can always know what "people" are loving to do when they disagree with us. Most of your descriptions of why and how people disagree with your position could just as easily be applied to yourself and that wouldn't make them true. I don't think seeing Harry's faking his ability at Potions as dishonest has to come from a love of criticizing Harry. Sometimes people just see things differently. Your defenses of Harry can be just as easily described as trying new things as each one gets shot down. The fact that it would be best for the class to all learn the Potions correctly seems to follow logically from your own claim that it's good for Harry to use the right instructions. I'm not interested in coming up with a fictional Snape vs. Harry debate on this subject (especially one that hops back to the idea that Harry's doing extra Potions research himself). There aren't any parallels between Snape and Harry in this particular instance, and I see as little benefit in arguing whether Snape would be defended in this situation (any more than I see a point in arguing that if Harry joined the Death Eaters he wouldn't be criticized for it). I'm sure he would be--just as Harry's being defended here. And in both cases there would be other people describing what they thought would be the right thing to do, whether or not they liked the character or not. Impatience with one character being given a free pass doesn't make one immune from ever doing the same thing for characters one likes. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 19:02:33 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:02:33 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: <26270519.1172514942771.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165458 > From: eggplant107 > >It's only a mystery if you insist on making it mysterious; the events > >on that tower were pretty straightforward. It's as if I were to say > >Harry had a wonderful reason for not telling the authorities about the > >potions book, but we readers just haven't been informed of it yet. > >Snape always gets a free pass, Harry and Hermione never do. Bart: > When Dumbledore say, "Severus, please...", what is the rest of the sentence? Is it really that straightforward? Why, when the normally self-controlled Snape is running away, is he yelling instructions to Harry on what he needs to do to defeat Voldemort? Alla: Agreed about the sentence, it can be interpreted several ways ( which does not make me think of the events on the Tower itself as more complex, only of what happened before) But this is the good example - I think the idea that Snape shouts instructions to Harry is one of the most notstraightforward interpretations. As far as I am concerned, he does what he always does - he gloats. here the reason is Harry's unability to perform unforgivables. That is just my opinion of course. From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Feb 26 19:18:44 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 14:18:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: Growing into the Hero Message-ID: <8627254.1172517524998.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165459 From: colebiancardi >Ok, so, I thought this was a pretty good definition of a Hero for the >HP stories. Nothing new. Therefore, the criticism around the HBP >book & Harry is the flaw. It isn't a big one as far as flaws go, or >life threatening. However, if Harry doesn't learn from this flaw, >will he pick up and run with it - i.e. continuing to repeat this >character flaw over & over again, which may lead to a tragic end. >The flaw is not the use of the book, but the stealing of credit. Bart: Actually, what I see as Harry's most basic flaw (and, as befits a hero, a very human flaw) which he needs to overcome is that he puts all his effort into what comes to him easily, and he avoids putting effort into what he finds difficult. The problem is the degree to which he does this; the reliance on Hermione for his homework, his giving more importance to things like Quidditch and the House Cup than to his studies, or even his work against Voldemort. Consider, in OOP, he is told that his highest priority is learning Occlumancy, and he doesn't even make a real attempt to learn it. In HPB, he is supposed to gain Sluggy's confidence, and use it to get Sluggy to reveal something which, while personally embarrassing, is ultimately towards Sluggy's own good (as he considers himself a target for Voldemort). And, if he used his secretly gained knowledge from the Snapester's book to get the info, then it would have been a deception towards the ultimate good (at least I don't recall Dumbledore saying, "Your first priority is to learn as much as you can from your courses"). But Harry is actually reluctant to ruin his falsely founded good standing with Sluggy to do what was REALLY important (although he DOES end up sacrificing his slyly gotten FF potion for the greater good). I think that Harry might have done better under Phinny Black's tutelage rather than Dumbledore; Phinny has (had? I still don't have the portrait business quite down yet) a way of getting people so angry at him that they do exactly what he wants them to do, just to show him up. Picture, "Well, I guess you can't be blamed if you are too stupid to learn Occlumancy." Bart From lealess at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 19:35:54 2007 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:35:54 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165460 > > People love to criticize Harry (I don't pretend to know why), if one > reason for doing so gets shot down try another. If there had been a > scene in one of the books of Snape in his chambers consulting a very > rare old potions book I doubt we would have heard one word of > criticism from anybody because Snape has that all important Free > Pass, Harry has never even seen one. > > Eggplant > I wish someone would define "Free Pass" for me and tell me when it actually applies. Snape is needlesssly mean to his students, probably just to bolster a fragile self-image. This makes him petty and pathetic. And yet, the students seem unaffected by this as a whole, with the exception of Neville, and even he gets over it. Therefore, why should Snape have to pay for his cruelty, when it has no lasting effects? In the real world, teachers don't pay for Snape's behavior, except in loss of popularity. They might be called to account if they inflict actual harm, but again, we don't see this long-term harm at Hogwarts. We do hear of cruel behavior towards others by students, however, such as Luna Lovegood, Montague, Moaning Myrtle... and perhaps Severus Snape. Why should the students get a free pass? Because they are young? That just doesn't hold up as an excuse for me, especially as the students get older. Snape sneaks around. He often jumps to the wrong conclusion, quickly and quite emotionally, as in the Shrieking Shack, probably both times he was in it. This makes him stupid when he should be smart. Should he have to pay for these quite-human errors, ones he shares with almost every other character in the books? Snape is a grown-up who seems to hold to an adolescent grudge. His growth as a person is stunted. He made horrible mistakes of judgment in his past. Yet who knows what Snape did as a Death Eater beside "see things?" We know he revealed the Prophecy to Voldemort, leading to Harry's parents' death. I grant that this was not good, under any circumstance, even if Dumbledore told him to do it (which I personally doubt). Yet how do we know that Snape hasn't felt genuine remorse and tried to pay for his mistakes, that he hasn't continued to pay for them by working to make retribution the rest of his life, perhaps at great danger to himself? Other crimes Snape might want to pay for include making an Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa, failing to deter Draco, and killing Dumbledore. Again, I think there is more than meets the eye to all of these stories. But as someone who reputedly worked to save first- year Harry, to repay a life debt which Dumbledore found curiously amusing, Snape probably doesn't let's himself off the hook for anything. I believe that his conscience is still troubled over his *big* errors (not cruel comments to a student, which is turning out to be a big mistake after all) and will probably always be. So, no free pass there. Snape is not someone a person would feel a lot of sympathy for, because he is an adult who seems to have power. I sympathize with him, however, and think that, despite his tremendous flaws, he is working to correct the wrong he has done and help bring about the defeat of Voldemort. However, his flaws prevent him from becoming more agreeable to other people and from finding support in other people, which is sad. Dumbledore was sympathetic enough to overlook those flaws to see someone of greater value within. I think Dumbledore felt sad for him, too, however. I criticize Harry because I see him walking down a dangerous path, not even looking where he is going. He shouldn't be trying to cast Cruciatus curses or Sectumsempra again, as Snape advises him. He shouldn't allow himself to be filled with such hatred it blinds him to possibilities around him. I let him off the hook about as much as I let young Severus off the hook for the same things. Sixteen is old enough to know right from wrong, and yet sixteen-year-olds make horrendous mistakes out of emotional and social circumstances. Some people never stop being sixteen, or eleven. I hope that Harry will. I hope Severus will, as well. And, speaking as a teacher who tries to make the road for my students as clear as possible, with signposts and flashing lights, I am thrilled when students consult on old book or seek help to clarify a question. This shows me they are engaged with the subject. It's when they copy from that book or from their helping friend and claim credit for it on their own that I kick them to the curb. It's not a moral question, although plagiarism is against college rules. For me, it is more that they are not learning the skills they need to do the job they say they want to do. That's why I'm there, to teach them those skills. They only cheat themselves when they take the easy way out. lealess From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 19:55:32 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:55:32 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound/Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165461 lealess: > Snape is needlesssly mean to his students, probably just to bolster a > fragile self-image. This makes him petty and pathetic. And yet, the > students seem unaffected by this as a whole, with the exception of > Neville, and even he gets over it. Therefore, why should Snape have > to pay for his cruelty, when it has no lasting effects? Alla: Probably because to some people his cruelty does have lasting effects. Snape, as far as I can see and concerned, owns the whole Harry mistrusting him and hating him problem. I blame Snape for Harry's inability to view him as a teacher, but only as enemy, period. I blame Snape for that. So to me it is a very long and lasting effect or as DD called Occlumency lessons - a fiasco. IMO of course. And of course the fact that Neville **was** affected and may turned out to be able to overcome Snape's cruelty does not make Snape any less responsible in my eyes. I do not think that teacher should be allowed to abuse a student ( which is what I believe Snape was doing, reasonable minds do differ of course), thinking that at the end student would be able to overcome it. And in fact, we do not see Neville's boggart changed, no? So, to me it is not even a fact that he was able to overcome what Snape did to him. I mean it does not really matter for me, I would still view Snape behaviour as the same, but I am just not sure that it happened. Again JMO. Alla. From dougsamu at golden.net Mon Feb 26 19:58:17 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 14:58:17 -0500 Subject: On the trivial and the profound (was: On lying and cheating) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165462 I find it interesting that people repeated raise the idea that Dumbledore is manipulating things from the background. Jennifer: > In using the other instructions in the book he got a leg > up on everyone else in the class. In OotP Harry is guilty of giving > several others a leg up. Is that dishonest or was it for the > greater good? Until we reach the end, we won't know if this means is justified. There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in. _________ From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 20:34:19 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:34:19 -0000 Subject: Growing into the Hero In-Reply-To: <8627254.1172517524998.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165463 > Bart: > I think that Harry might have done better under Phinny Black's tutelage rather than Dumbledore; Phinny has (had? I still don't have the portrait business quite down yet) a way of getting people so angry at him that they do exactly what he wants them to do, just to show him up. Picture, "Well, I guess you can't be blamed if you are too stupid to learn Occlumancy." zgirnius: I'm not so sure this is the case. It certainly works for some people (I know I've fallen for it in the past ), but I am less sure Harry is one of them. It seems to me this is Snape's approach to teaching as well, and with Harry and Neville it is not all that successful. (Hermione, on the other hand, is eager to start proving she is not a dunderhead from Day One). From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Feb 26 20:59:48 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 15:59:48 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Growing into the Hero Message-ID: <6019973.1172523588844.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165464 >> Bart: >> I think that Harry might have done better under Phinny Black's >tutelage rather than Dumbledore; Phinny has (had? I still don't have >the portrait business quite down yet) a way of getting people so angry >at him that they do exactly what he wants them to do, just to show him >up. Picture, "Well, I guess you can't be blamed if you are too stupid >to learn Occlumancy." > >zgirnius: >I'm not so sure this is the case. It certainly works for some people (I >know I've fallen for it in the past ), but I am less sure Harry is >one of them. It seems to me this is Snape's approach to teaching as >well, and with Harry and Neville it is not all that successful. >(Hermione, on the other hand, is eager to start proving she is not a >dunderhead from Day One). Bart: Not entirely. In OOP, PNB seems to be about the ONLY one who can get through Harry's thick skull. But he is subtly different than Snape, in that he doesn't assume that the kid is going to fail, nor does he appear to be uneven handed. I have seen a few depictions of the devil, or a satanic character, who does not want evil to triumph, but is cursed to try to ensure that it does. Generally, they will do whatever they can to sabotage themselves, and, if they win (evil wins, that is), they are clearly disappointed, but if they lose, they are quite pleased. Phineas "feels" to me to have a low opinion of others, but is happy when proven wrong. Snape, on the other hand, HATES to be proven wrong. From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 22:16:48 2007 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:16:48 -0000 Subject: Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To t... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165465 Sorry for the delay in answering this, Pippin; I've just gotten back from Florida, where I had blue skies, warm water and wonderful seafood, but, alas, no easy way to get Internet access. Pippin: >I speculate. But it still means the burden is on Harry to know >whether the spell is safe to use or not. Amiable Dorsai: Here's where we differ, I think. More in a bit. Pippin: >You make it sound like Harry looked up as he fell and saw >Sectum Sempra written on the ceiling. He had the spell "up his >sleeve" as Ginny puts it, and he'd put it there with no intention >of testing it to see whether it was relatively harmless before >trying it. He just assumed that it was. That assumption was not >only stupid, it was negligent, IMO. Amiable Dorsai: Yep, this is where we differ. I think Harry would, indeed, have been negligent had he cast it at Ron, say, or McLaggen, or even at Draco at any time other than in the heat of battle. Harry didn't need "safe". He needed effective, and he needed it now. Draco forfeited any right he had to "safe" as soon as he tried to use an Unforgivable. Pippin: >I'm no expert, but it seems that in the UK and the US, only the >use of reasonable force is justified in defending oneself from >attack. Amiable Dorsai: It's really dangerous to argue that Wizarding Law is very congruent to the Muggle Law of modern Britain or of the United States: Draco and Ron, first year, both seemed to think that some sort of code duello was still in force, for example. Pippin: >Harry thought he was using reasonable force but that itself was >not a reasonable assumption, and Harry should have known that. Amiable Dorsai: I am so not a lawyer, either, but a bit of Googling reveals that the notion of what constitutes "reasonable force" varies, and has varied in both places over time and between jurisdictions?at one point, in England, you could kill a burglar who broke into your home, even if you did not feel endangered, even if he was fleeing. For all we know, British Wizard Law may still feature this sort of?to our eyes?archaism. Most of us probably feel that random burglarcide is well past a civilized line, though. So what might be a less extreme definition? Many cultures that have allowed personal self-defense, (not all cultures have; in fact, the whole idea seems to be relatively new to western law) have allowed that deadly force is perfectly "reasonable" in situations where the defender could, in good faith, believe his life was in danger. Harry had excellent reason to believe his life was in danger. Draco has threatened his life before. Draco has, in Harry's hearing, expressed a desire to aid a would-be killer--the Heir of Slytherin--to murder other students. Draco has professed to be eager to join and serve the murderer of Harry's parents--a man who has murdered many others and who has several times attempted to murder Harry himself. Harry knows that Draco is, in fact, doing this man's bidding. Harry believes (correctly) that Draco has colluded in at least two murder attempts. Harry knows that Draco has received training in at least one sort of magic, Legilimency, from Bellatrix Lestrange. He has no reason to believe that Legilimency is the only thing Draco has learned from his psychopathic aunt. Even the attempt to cast Cruciatus shows that Draco is out of control?if he'll cast one Unforgivable, what (from Harry's point of view) is to stop him from casting another? All this is a long-winded way of reiterating my point: Harry had, morally, and, probably, legally, a right to use deadly force. He does not appear to have wanted to do so; in fact he's clearly horrified by the results of "Sectumsempra" but his back was against the wall, he had no time to pick and choose, and he succeeded in his primary goal of staying alive. Not bad, even if using "Sectumsempra" loses him points from the Durmstrang judge. Amiable Dorsai From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Feb 26 22:45:42 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:45:42 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165466 Bart Lidofsky Wrote: > When Dumbledore say, "Severus, > please...", what is the rest of > the sentence? Severus, please don't prove I've been wrong about you for 17 years. > Is it really that straightforward? Yes I think it is. There is a simple straightforward explanation for all the events that happened on the tower that horrible night, but only if you are willing to abandon your perceptions of Snape that you made before book 6 came out. It's only if you insist that Snape is good do the events of that night become more than just mysterious, they become downright bizarre. No matter how much you love a theory if it doesn't fit the facts you must abandon it. I could be wrong of course, perhaps JKR will find a rational reason a good Snape would make that vow (it all comes down to that vow), in fact I would be delighted if she could pull that miracle off, but I doubt it's possible. I think it will be revealed in the last book that Snape is not totally evil, but I think Snape lovers should be prepared for the fact that he's not nearly as good as they think he is. But as I say I could be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. "sistermagpie" Wrote: > I don't think seeing Harry's faking > his ability at Potions as dishonest > has to come from a love of criticizing Harry. Don't be silly, of course people love to criticize Harry! Do you honestly think this thread would be one tenth as long as it is if Draco had done it, or Snape? And Harry wasn't faking; he really could make better potions than anybody else in the class. I'd like to make a brief diversion because I hope somebody can clear up a mystery for me. As I said before Harry and Hermione NEVER get a free pass, but strangely Ron does. Without a doubt in 6 books the absolute worst behavior of any of the 3 main characters was Ron's in book 4. He had a fight with his best friend and it was more than just a little spat, it lasted about a month. Remember this was a friend who saved his sister's life, a friend who demonstrated a willingness to risk his own life to save Ron too. I understand why he had the fight, he was jealous of Harry, and I understand why he was jealous, he was insecure; however understanding why somebody is obnoxious does not make him one bit less obnoxious. Poor Harry was going through a very difficult time, he was scared to death he was going to get killed in the first task of the Tri-Wizard tournament, or even worse, make a complete fool of himself. He was at a really low point in his life, everybody except Hermione thought he was a liar, he was worried Sirius would get caught, most of the students seemed to hate him, he was depressed, he was terrified, and he needed moral support from Ron. He didn't get it. Harry didn't ask Ron to risk his life, he just asked him to believe him when he said he didn't put his name in the cup, he just asked him to be his friend. Ron refused; Harry's only friend was Hermione. Sure it was difficult for Ron to live under the shadow of his brothers, but it's hard for me to get very weepy over Ron's early years. Everybody has problems growing up but it seems to me Ron's childhood was pretty wonderful, as close to being perfect as anybody ever had. Harry's childhood on the other hand was hell, a pure undiluted nightmare, but that never made him let down a friend at the very time he needed help the most. Harry has forgiven Ron so I guess I should too, but what I want to know is, did Ron get that free pass from the same place that Snape did? What do Snape and Ron have in common? "lealess" Wrote: > I wish someone would define "Free Pass" for me Why? You know perfectly well what it means. > how do we know that Snape hasn't felt genuine > remorse and tried to pay for his mistakes One of Snape's "mistakes" led to the death of the Potters, if he felt genuine remorse over that it seems odd he would treat their only son like shit for 6 years. > Other crimes Snape might want to pay > for include making an Unbreakable Vow > with Narcissa That is the mother load! If you can find a RATIONAL reason a good Snape would make that vow you will instantly turn me from being a Snape hater into a Snape lover. > someone who reputedly worked to save first- > year Harry That's true, but in 6 books that's the only good thing Snape ever did, and I have an explanation why an evil Snape would do exactly the same thing. > He [Harry] shouldn't be trying to cast > Cruciatus curses or Sectumsempra again Yes, but I sure hope he does! > I am thrilled when students consult > on old book or seek help to clarify a question. Excellent! It sound to me like you are a good teacher. > It's when they copy from that book or from their > helping friend and claim credit for it on their > own that I kick them to the curb. But Harry did nothing of the sort, he never claimed to have invented those potions, he just read a book that improved his skill at making them. Harry had a choice to make, he could follow a good way to make potions or he could follow a crappy way; Harry chose the good way. To my dying day I will never be able to find anything wrong with that. Eggplant From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 23:11:52 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:11:52 -0000 Subject: Lying vs Murder (was:Re: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165468 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Did Snape behave badly on the Tower, even in a minor way? It > > will depend on if he actually killed Dumbledore. And even then, > > I see a viable reason for him to have done so, though that > > doesn't change the action, of course. (I'm assuming DDM. If > > Snape is actually ESE, then that changes everything.) > > On the other hand, Harry did lie (by omission, but that's still > > lying) about his potion knowledge. And by lying about his > > knowledge he did cheat. It was a minor thing. I'm not expecting > > JKR to kill him off because of it. But it was also a petty > > thing. It didn't gain anything for the war effort. Which makes > > it worse, IMO. Because it's just a way for Harry to slide by, > > rather than a choice to do a wrong thing for a real gain. Does > > that make sense? > >>Alla: > I am afraid it does not make sense for me. You are in essense > saying that for you Harry using Prince potions book and passing > Prince work as his own is a worse offense than killing a human > being, are you not? > Betsy Hp: Gosh, is that what I was saying? In general, of course murder is worse than lying. And getting a bit more specific, murder is worse than Harry lying about his potions knowledge. But when you get down to the very specific case of DDM! Snape killing Dumbledore on the Tower and Harry lying about his potions knowledge, was what Harry did worse than what DDM!Snape did? To reach a conclusion let's contemplate the following three questions: (1) What good is gained? Harry's lie causes Slughorn to think Harry is a potions genius. But the Order doesn't benefit from that. Slughorn already liked Harry and the fight against Voldemort is not helped by Harry *appearing* to be a potions genius. By killing Dumbledore, DDM!Snape sets himself up as totally loyal to Voldemort. He has earned Voldemort's trust and is in a better position to help bring Voldemort down. Answer: Good is not gained by Harry's lie. Good is gained by DDM! Snape's murder. (2) Who, if anyone, benefits? Harry's actions do not benefit Harry since his lie prevents him from actually learning potions. Harry has been morally compromised because he is lying. The note about the Bezoar saves Ron's life, but that was not dependent on Harry lying about his potion knowledge. DDM!Snape's actions benefit the Order by giving them a better placed spy. But at the same time they morally compromise DDM!Snape because he has killed. Answer: Harry's actions benefit no one. DDM!Snape's actions do not benefit DDM!Snape but they do benefit the Order. (3) Was the action thought out? Harry doesn't think about what he is doing. He uses the Prince's knowledge and passes it off as his own because it was made easy for him to do so. DDM!Snape has contemplated the costs and benefits of committing murder to further the Order's cause. He has discussed same with Dumbledore himself. Answer: Harry is acting thoughtlessly. DDM!Snape is acting thoughtfully. Conclusion: While Harry is acting in a selfish and thoughtless manner to the benefit of no one, Snape is acting in a self-sacrificing, thoughtful manner with benefit to good. So in this specific case, lying is worse than murder. Seriously, I did this as a sort of ethical / philosophical exercise. And of course I ignored the fact that Harry's lie only hurts himself (I'm relying on the fact that the NEWT will keep Harry from becoming an Auror if he really isn't qualified) and Snape's actions (if he *did* kill Dumbledore) hurt Dumbledore. There is the complicating factor of Dumbledore's wishes that I sort of brushed over. But a big question is, did Dumbledore *want* Snape to kill him. And if so, does that factor in at all? And of course I totally ignored the torn soul thing. Um, does that answer your question, Alla? Betsy Hp (guessing "no" since I'm not sure *I* even know what I'm saying) From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Feb 26 23:21:04 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:21:04 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165469 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > One of Snape's "mistakes" led to the death of the Potters, if he > felt genuine remorse over that it seems odd he would treat their > only son like shit for 6 years. Valky: HAhaha, good one there Eggplant, you're right. I actually think Snape probably feel remorse for what he did, but he doesn't connect that responsibility to Harry's suffering and loss of his family. If he did I think he would at least make a half effort to act respectfully toward Harry, regardless of his ire. Instead he goes out of his way to show his contempt and lack of respect to Harry, and not even in a public way that you could believe was just a clever cover for an agent, surreptitiously and directly in a personal sense. If I'm right that he feels remorse then his actions are extremely childish and self centered. And it is, as Eggplant implies, either that, or he has no remorse at all. There's no 'nice guy well intended' Snape in this picture. > > It's when they copy from that book or from their > > helping friend and claim credit for it on their > > own that I kick them to the curb. > > But Harry did nothing of the sort, he never claimed to have invented > those potions, I agree with you again, Eggplant, on this point. Harry did not 'claim' the credit willfully, he allowed it to be given and withheld correction. I know a lot of people on the other side of the debate recognise this distinction (Carol ;) ) and don't see it as a mitigation, and that's a fair stand I won't argue against it. OTOH, the one time Harry really worried about his 'potions genius' moniker falling by the wayside was the Golpalott's Law class, which was also the time when he first planned to probe Slughorn about the Horcruxes. And so at least a good part of his basis for caring about said reputation and being determined to keep it was that he believed it would help him get the information he needed. It turned out afterward to be of some help for him to have the good reputation for potions making in order to get the lost memory from Slughorn because it created a visible and tangible connection between Harry and Lily in Slughorns mind. So in a sense Harryr was right when he felt it was a desperate necessity to keep his reputation up. And although the Bezoar trick in that particular class wasn't the sealing of the deal, it helped in the end, as it reinforced Slughorns reminiscence of Lily as a factor in the student teacher relationship. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 23:27:15 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:27:15 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound/Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165470 Alla wrote: > And in fact, we do not see Neville's boggart changed, no? Carol responds: True, we don't see any Boggarts except Molly Weasley's (and, briefly, Lupin's) after PoA. But I think we do have an indication that Neville's fears are taking a more realistic direction, relating to the true terror in his past, the Crucioing of his parents into insanity. Consider, first, his reaction to Fake!Moody, who Crucioed the spider in front of him, knowing full well that Neville's parents had been Crucioed into insanity because he had been partly responsible for that terrible deed, along with Bellatrix, Rodolphus, and Rabastan Lestrange: "Moody raised his wand again, pointed it at the spider, and mutteed, '*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. . . . 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 Am. ed. 215). Nothing Snape has done to Neville has been anywhere near as cruel as using this horrible Unforgiveable Curse, even on a spider, in front of a boy whose parents were driven to insanity by that same curse, not to mention needlessly prolonging that curse. (We're dealing with a heartless death Eater here, not a mean teacher who's tired of melted cauldrons and can't tolerate incompetence.) Nor does Neville recover quickly from the horror and shock of this experience. After class, HRH find Neville standing alone, staring at a stone wall "with the same horrified, wide-eyed look he had worn when Moody had demonstrated the Cruciatus Curse." Neville's voice is higher pitched than usual, He can't even carry on a normal conversation ("Very interesting dinner--I mean lesson--What's for eating?") He looks even more frightened when Fake!Moody invites him to tea (not for any noble purpose, of course, though Neville doesn't know that). No one else in the class reacts as Neville does. The others look frightened after the Cruciatus Curse, but they talk excitedly about the lesson "as though it had been some spectacular show" (218). Even Harry, whose parents were killed by Avada Kedavra (also demonstrated by Fake!Moody right in front of him) and who gives Ron an apparently angry look when he thoughtlessly rambles on about the way the spider died, gets over the horror fairly quickly. But Neville, who sees his permanently incapacitated parents at least once a year (and hoards the bubblegum wrappers that his mother gives him), is still remembering the lesson that night, lying awake along with Harry, who, preoccupied with Sirius Black, fails to realize from "the absence of Neville's usual snores" (227) that Neville is also unable to sleep. That this cruel lesson from Fake!Moody is a kind of wake-up call for Neville, an indication of the true, underlying fears that he's been suppressing beneath his forgetfulness and timidity (he was cowed by his grandmother before he ever met Snape), is shown later when Harry opens his golden egg: "'What was that?' said Seamus Finnegan. "Sounded like a banshee. . . .' "'It was someone being tortured!' said Neville, who had gone very white and had spilled sausage rolls all over the floor. "You're going to have to fight the Cruciatus Curse!'" (366). Seamus's Boggart in PoA was a Banshee. Neville's was Snape in his role as Potions Master, not the much more terrifying Death Eaters who Crucioed his parents into insanity when he was one or two. Sounds to me as if Neville's fears have taken a more realistic direction as of GoF, one that makes him apply himself in Harry's DA lessons in the next book. And in OoP, he's actually Crucio'd by Bellatrix herself. If his Boggart is still Professor Snape at that point, then Neville has some serious problems with priorities. Carol, expecting Neville to confront his true enemy, Bellatrix, at some point in DH From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 23:32:06 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:32:06 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165471 Eggplant: > Yes I think it is. There is a simple straightforward explanation for > all the events that happened on the tower that horrible night, but > only if you are willing to abandon your perceptions of Snape that you > made before book 6 came out. zgirnius: I thought Snape was a cool character with a fascinating backstory as a maybe spy based on the first five books, but did not have a strong opinion on which side, if any, he favored. I decided he was a white hat on my first reading of "Spinner's End", and nothing else that happened in HBP changed my mind, because I did not find the events on the tower at all straightforward. Dumbledore's immediate reaction to Snape, and Snape's complete lack of comment to Dumbledore, both made no sense to me on an evil Snape scenario. (Still don't). Also, the further backstory of Snape we got in the book fit what we already know of the man, in my mind. (ie, that he reported the prophecy, but was thereafter so remorseful about it that he 'returned'). Naturally, Bart may have had different views from mine. > Eggplant: > Harry has forgiven Ron so I guess > I should too, but what I want to know is, did Ron get that free > pass from the same place that Snape did? What do Snape and > Ron have in common? zgirnius: In terms of personality, not all that much that I can see. In terms of story, there is a certain similarity (looking through DDM! lenses, naturally). Yes, Ron wasn't there when Harry needed him in GoF. But afterwards, Ron realized that he was wrong, and Harry forgave him. What has Ron done since then? Most notably, in OotP Ron participated in the trip to the Ministry, an action which could have resulted in his expulsion from school and even his death (he was actually seriously injured), in HBP he, at Harry's request, attempted to foil a Death Eater raid on the school, again risking his life for Harry, and finally, also in HBP, he and Hermione made the decision to accompany Harry on his Horcrux quest, again a decision which could have the most serious of consequences for Ron. Harry might not have known, when he forgave Ron, that Ron would do all this in the future - however, perhaps he also remembered a certain moment in PoA, which occured short months before the fight. (The speaker is Ron, he is addressing Sirius Black, and can barely stand because his leg is injured.) > PoA: > "If you want to kill Harry, you'll have to kill us too!" he said fiercely, though the effort of standing upright was draining him of still more color, and he swayed slightly as he spoke. I would also add, that Harry has not always been a perfect friend to Ron, though mention of specific instances seems petty. For example, Harry was not at all supportive of Ron when Ron became a Prefect. Sure, Harry has bigger fish to fry and the world to save - but that sort of one-sidedness is something Ron generally understands and accepts in the relationship. I do think he is a wonderful friend to Harry. Anyway, the similarity to DDM!Snape lies in that Snape, too, did something horrible in joining the DEs and reporting the Prophecy. (Rather more horrible than a month-long spat with a friend....) And if Dumbledore is to be believed, he realized that he was wrong, and has tried to make amends through his potentially very dangerous role as a spy for Dumbledore among the DEs. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Feb 26 23:37:47 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:37:47 -0000 Subject: Free Pass (was: On the trivial and the profound) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165472 lealess wrote: > > I wish someone would define "Free Pass" for me eggplant replied: > Why? You know perfectly well what it means. SSSusan butts in to say: Eggplant, perhaps you have reason to believe that Lealess knows perfectly well (I don't know), but the truth is that *I* really don't know perfectly well what it means. I read your previous post, where you talked about Ron getting a free pass, and I think I understand what you meant in that situation in 4th year. But I'm just not seeing a parallel with Snape re: that terminology. So color me dense if you will, but I sincerely could use a definition of 'free pass.' Siriusly Snapey Susan From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Feb 26 23:37:23 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:37:23 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165473 > >>Magpie: > > I don't think seeing Harry's faking > > his ability at Potions as dishonest > > has to come from a love of criticizing Harry. > >>Eggplant: > Don't be silly, of course people love to criticize Harry! Do you > honestly think this thread would be one tenth as long as it is if > Draco had done it, or Snape? > Betsy Hp: It'd be silly to think otherwise. Once again, I've yet to see people post about hating the Harry threads as they do the Snape threads. And even in this Harry thread, Snape got dragged in. I suspect that if someone with a scientific or mathmatical mind got into it, Snape, Draco and Harry would be found to be the more popular characters to discuss. > >>Eggplant: > I'd like to make a brief diversion because I hope somebody can clear > up a mystery for me. As I said before Harry and Hermione NEVER get a > free pass, but strangely Ron does. Without a doubt in 6 books the > absolute worst behavior of any of the 3 main characters was Ron's in > book 4. > > ...but what I want to know is, did Ron get that free pass from the > same place that Snape did? > Betsy Hp: I'll take a wild guess and say that it's because this incident took place two books and seven years ago? Have you searched the archives for threads from that time period? Because as far as I can recall, Ron's actions in GoF were a big reason for the wife-abuser!Ron theories that circled the fandom for a while there. It's also one of the major citations given for the traitor!Ron predictions that get made whenever fans start making predictions. > >>lealess: > > I wish someone would define "Free Pass" for me > >>Eggplant: > Why? You know perfectly well what it means. Betsy Hp: Blech... This is one of those non-answers I despise. It's right up there with, "You mean you don't *know*!?!" that was so popular back in grade school. I'll make the same assumption I made when children gave that answer to a question: you have no idea what you mean when you say "free pass". Betsy Hp From moosiemlo at gmail.com Tue Feb 27 00:43:49 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 16:43:49 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0702261643te7535bawc828c0a3a0512a2a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165474 Eggplant: It's only a mystery if you insist on making it mysterious; the events on that tower were pretty straightforward. It's as if I were to say Harry had a wonderful reason for not telling the authorities about the potions book, but we readers just haven't been informed of it yet. Snape always gets a free pass, Harry and Hermione never do. Lynda: The entire Lightning struck tower scenario, reads like a set up, pure and simple. The problem is, that it also reads in a very straitforward manner, so we have to read the rest of the story to learn the truth and that's where the mystery lies. Was it a set up or was it straitforward? Only the middle of July will tell... Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 01:50:04 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 01:50:04 -0000 Subject: Lying vs Murder (was:Re: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165475 :: Mike, putting on his horns, affixing his pointed tail and :: grabbing his pitchfork in preparation to play Devil's Advocate > Betsy Hp: > > > To reach a conclusion let's contemplate the following three > questions: > > (1) What good is gained? > Harry's lie causes Slughorn to think Harry is a potions genius. > But the Order doesn't benefit from that. Slughorn already liked > Harry and the fight against Voldemort is not helped by Harry > *appearing* to be a potions genius. DA: But doesn't Harry's potion genius rep cause Slughorn to make the connection between Harry and Lily? Doesn't this later allow Harry to play off the supposed connection when he's trying to worm that memory out of Slughorn? > Victim, ah I mean Betsy: > By killing Dumbledore, DDM!Snape sets himself up as totally loyal > to Voldemort. He has earned Voldemort's trust and is in a better > position to help bring Voldemort down. DA: Of course this assumes Snape isn't either ESE or OFH. But wouldn't not taking the UV and therefore having Dumbledore around be more valuable to the Order than getting Snape in tight with LV? Besides, how much tighter does Snape have to get? Spinner's End spun a scene wherein Snape is already closer to LV than even Bella, if you are to believe the Black sisters presentation of the situation at that time. How does killing Dumbledore, even on DD's orders, set up the Order better than having a live Dumbledore? And of how much use to the Order or Harry is a Snape who is so thoroughly mistrusted now? > Answer: Good is not gained by Harry's lie. Good is gained by DDM! > Snape's murder. DA: Hah! > Grist for the mill, ahh ... I mean Betsy again: > (2) Who, if anyone, benefits? > Harry's actions do not benefit Harry since his lie prevents him > from actually learning potions. Harry has been morally compromised > because he is lying. The note about the Bezoar saves Ron's life, > but that was not dependent on Harry lying about his potion > knowledge. DA: No, but using the book for the Bezoar trick (which as everyone has said, Harry did to perpetuate his "potions genius" rep) caused Slughorn to have that Bezoar in his personal potions kit. That same Bezoar was the one that Harry shoves down Ron's throat, iirc. I may be wrong about this, maybe Sluggy always has a Beezer with him. But even if that's true, how did Harry know that? Or did Harry see Sluggy put the classroom Buzzer into his kit off-camera. It was also at this point of the book that Harry was, for the first time that I see, going to try to exploit his rep to get the memory out of Slughorn. Does anyone have an example before this wherein Harry even thinks this rep is a good thing, much less use it to any advantage? Hmmmm? > Sacrificial Lamb, oops, I mean Betsy again: > DDM!Snape's actions benefit the Order by giving them a better > placed spy. But at the same time they morally compromise DDM!Snape > because he has killed. DA: I hate to sound redundant < he says sneeringly > but exactly how much closer to LV can Snape get? And how do you know Snape hasn't killed in the past, not counting the obvious aiding and abetting on the Potter murders? What's another notch in your soul amongst friends? > > Answer: Harry's actions benefit no one. DDM!Snape's actions do not > benefit DDM!Snape but they do benefit the Order. DA: Pshaw I say, pshaw > Reeling Opponent, well it's gotta be Betsy: > (3) Was the action thought out? > Harry doesn't think about what he is doing. He uses the Prince's > knowledge and passes it off as his own because it was made easy for > him to do so. DA: Well he's done nothing wrong by using the Prince's notes, in my book. But how fair is it to condemn Harry for accepting accolades for potions genius if at the same time you are going to say he isn't really thinking about it? If he is deliberately claiming the Prince's ideas as his own, he has to have thought about it. Conversely, if he isn't thinking about it then he also isn't really actively taking credit for his new rep. Are you now going to say it was Harry's fault for getting a rep that he didn't pursue but was instead thrust upon him by Slughorn? That seems to make it Harry's fault before the fact. > About to receive her knockout blow Betsy: > DDM!Snape has contemplated the costs and benefits of committing > murder to further the Order's cause. He has discussed same with > Dumbledore himself. DA: Hah! How do you *know* he's discussed this with DD? That argument in the forest and Hagrid's recounting of it are hardly conclusive. We have *No* idea if DDM!Snape or any other flavor Snape ever broached the subject of killing Dumbledore with Dumbledore. For all we know the decision to kill Dumbledore happened while we were watching it, on-stage on the tower. This may speak for a quick on the uptake Snape rather than a well thought out, this is what I'm going to do Snape. Oh and of course, I must mention that Snape backed himself into the corner and *had* to kill DD because of the Vow. IOW, even DDM! Snape screwed up way back in the beginning, and whether or not killing DD sets him up better for the Order, he is undoubtedly saving his own neck by killing DD. He may have contemplated that, but that hardly gives him points in my book. > > Answer: Harry is acting thoughtlessly. DDM!Snape is acting > thoughtfully. DA: Raises arm triumphantly, having dealt knockout blow. Glowers down at fallen opponent. DAs are not graceful winners. > Not sure who this is, Betsy's unconscious: > Conclusion: > While Harry is acting in a selfish and thoughtless manner to the > benefit of no one, Snape is acting in a self-sacrificing, > thoughtful manner with benefit to good. So in this specific case, > lying is worse than murder. DA: Sorry, but you have a lot of questions to answer before you get to make these claims, whoever you are. > Obviously, Betsy's second: > Seriously, I did this as a sort of ethical / philosophical > exercise. And of course I ignored the fact that Harry's lie only > hurts himself (I'm relying on the fact that the NEWT will keep > Harry from becoming an Auror if he really isn't qualified) and > Snape's actions (if he *did* kill Dumbledore) hurt Dumbledore. > > There is the complicating factor of Dumbledore's wishes that I sort > of brushed over. But a big question is, did Dumbledore *want* > Snape to kill him. And if so, does that factor in at all? DA: Whoa, whoa, I'm not ready to get serious yet. > Betsy : > And of course I totally ignored the torn soul thing. DA: I didn't. MWAHAHAHAHA > > Betsy Hp (guessing "no" since I'm not sure *I* even know what I'm > saying) DA: SEE, I told you I knocked her silly. Winner by TKO, Da Advocate!! Mike: You know I love you Betsy or I never would have used you as my foil. Thanks for being a good sport. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 01:48:37 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 01:48:37 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's attitude (was Re: On lying and cheating) In-Reply-To: <014401c75890$2df0f710$2e8c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165476 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > > Magpie: > I don't see that it really matters whether an academic advantage is foremost > in Harry's mind when he does it. It seems like you're whole argument is that > things like academic honesty are petty when you're a guy like Harry who's > got the weight of the world on his shoulders. And that's a possible > position, but these things being "petty" in Harry's eyes doesn't mean > Harry's not taking the easy way over the right way in his Potions class > sixth year. Ahhh, right versus easy, the babbling of Dumbledore . Yet, what kind of messages is the "epitome of goodness" giving Harry with regard to Sluggy? Let us stipulate that the particular matter of the book never arises -- even after the episode with Draco (and one wonders what kind of discussions DD and Snapey-poo had after that one!). Still, DD gives Harry many messages with regard to Sluggy, and they aren't ones that emphasize respect and honesty. >From the very beginning, the attitude DD evinces toward Sluggy seems to one of disrespect and, let's face it, condescension. He makes clear at the very beginning that he is using Harry as "bait" to lure Sluggy back to Hogwarts, and tells Harry very specifically to be very careful and wary around his new teacher. Not a very good beginning, if you are thinking of a student/teacher relationship. And who's lead is Harry supposed to follow, that of some mythical "responsible adult" who doesn't exist in his life, or of DD who for all his extreme faults (particularly with regard to allowing Harry to be abused by Snape and the Dursleys), is after all the Headmaster and Sluggy's employer? As things events develop during HBP, it becomes clear that DD only wants Sluggy at Hogwarts for the purpose of ferreting out what he knows about Tom Riddle. He indeed makes no bones about it. Once again, not a builder of respect and honesty. And finally, to put the crown on the situation, he makes clear that he is very annoyed at Harry because Harry has not been crafty, manipulative, and dishonest ENOUGH in his dealings with Sluggy. And, if we are to judge by his snippet of conversation with Nigellus, he is supremely proud of his belief in Harry's ability to be crafty, ruthless, and dishonest in dealing with the new Potions master. So, Harry is supposed to step aside from this situation and say, "Well, let's be philosophical about this. I should do what is right, not what is easy, in my dealings with the new Potions teacher although the very man who talks about right vs. easy has expressed annoyance that I have not treated said teacher with dishonesty, craftiness, and manipulative lies and distortions. Well, obviously, however, these are two different situations under the rubrics of academic regulation and moral theory, and therefore I should make a clear demarcation between spinning a very elaborate and deliberate web of untruth in order to trick my teacher into revealing a memory he is very desperately trying to keep hidden, as opposed to simply keeping silent with regard to some notes in an old potions book that my teacher HIMSELF gave to me. Because obviously DD doesn't REALLY mean it when he expresses his annoyance and implies his lack of respect for Sluggy, and obviously it's MUCH more important that I rigorously reveal every detail with regard to a potions book than that I refrain from spinning a delberate web of lies and manipulation in order to overcome my teacher's defenses erected around a memory he obviously doesn't want to share. I mean, the formal rules of moral philosophy make this absolutely clear! I'll spend my evenings working out the symbolic logic of the situation!" Yeah, right. Lupinlore, who thinks of all the moral problems that arise in the Potterverse, this is easily the most overblown From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Feb 27 03:08:32 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 03:08:32 -0000 Subject: Lying vs Murder (was:Re: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165477 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > It was also at this point of the book that Harry was, for the first > time that I see, going to try to exploit his rep to get the memory > out of Slughorn. Does anyone have an example before this wherein > Harry even thinks this rep is a good thing, much less use it to any > advantage? Hmmmm? Valky: If you mean before Ron was poisoned, there is this earlier in the Chapter: Harry defending his class use of the Bezoar to Ron: -- "It would have looked stupid if we'd both done it!" said Harry irritably. "Look I had to soften him up so I could ask him about Voldemort, didn't I ? Oh will you *get a grip*!" He added in exasperation, as Ron winced at the sound of the name. -- Ch 18 HBP -- And if you mean before that, no he doesn't really consider the Potions reputation at all except for passing acknowledgment but he does say this: -- "For the Last Time" said Harry, speaking in a slightly hoarse whisper after three quarters of an hour silence, "I am not giving back this book, I've learned more from the Half-Blood Prince than Snaepe or Slughorn have taught me in -" **Harry is cut of by Hermione** --Ch 15 HBP-- Which clearly demonstrates Harry's concious intent to learn, not merely copy for the sake of academic credit, from the notes in the book. Another benefit of Harry using the HBP's notes which hasn't been noted before is that it prevented Draco the only major contender besides Hermione, from winning the Felix elicis at his first Potions lesson, imbibing the lot and managing to kill Dumbledore before Harry had even heard of Merope Gaunt, let alone a Horcrux. FWIW. From sweetophelia4u at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 02:51:43 2007 From: sweetophelia4u at yahoo.com (d. j. gorski) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:51:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bill and Snape and Horcruxes Message-ID: <383187.83693.qm@web55401.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165478 justcarol67 wrote: But Snape is probably the only person aside from Bill Weasley who can help Harry with Horcruxes and the only one who can help him locate them. sweetophelia4u says: Hi, I'm new here. Perhaps this comment refers to a previous thread? If not, could you please explain your reasoning behind Bill and Snape being the only ones who can help Harry with the Horcruxes? Thanks. >^,,^< Dondee "Yes, I live in my own little world. But it's okay. They know me there." From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 03:14:44 2007 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 03:14:44 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165479 Eggplant: > Harry has forgiven Ron so I guess > I should too, but what I want to know is, did Ron get that free > pass from the same place that Snape did? Amiable Dorsai: Free pass? Jeez, Eggplant, by the time of the third task, Ron was giving his own body as target practice. How much penance do you need? Eggplant: > That is the mother load! If you can find a RATIONAL reason a good > Snape would make that vow you will instantly turn me from being a > Snape hater into a Snape lover. Amiable Dorsai: Even for an inveterate Snape critic like myself, that's easy. DDM!Snape will take that vow in a second. Why? Because his whole function in the Death Eaters (remember, we're talking DDM!Snape here) is to garner information. Narcissa has information, important information, possibly, critical information. He needs, Dumbledore needs, that information. It is worth the risk of Snape's life, or so, he apparently judged, to obtain that information. Narcissa, handled adroitly, might spill it without the vow, but Bellatrix will probably curse her into silence before she can spill it to Snape. On the other hand, if he takes the Vow... Yes, taking the Vow is risky, even foolhardy, but spying on Voldemort is a job that is unlikely to allow you to spend any of your pension. This would be just one more risk. That he apparently could not get Narcissa to divulge Draco's task, even after vowing to complete it, is DDM!Snape's misfortune, not evidence of his treachery. It hurts me to admit that, because I despise the character, but fair's fair. DDM!Snape, if such he is, is a hero. A foul, disgusting hero, but a hero all the same. Amiable Dorsai From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Feb 27 03:30:35 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 03:30:35 -0000 Subject: Bill and Snape and Horcruxes In-Reply-To: <383187.83693.qm@web55401.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165480 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "d. j. gorski" wrote: > > justcarol67 wrote: > > But Snape is probably the only person aside from Bill Weasley who can help Harry > with Horcruxes and the only one who can help him locate them. > > sweetophelia4u says: > Hi, I'm new here. Perhaps this comment refers to a previous thread? If not, could you please explain your reasoning behind Bill and Snape being the only ones who can help Harry with the Horcruxes? Thanks. > > > >^,,^< Dondee > "Yes, I live in my own little world. > But it's okay. > They know me there." > Hi Dondee, welcome to the group. The answer to your question is that Bill Weasley is a professional Curse Breaker so he might be able to make himself useful in a quest to destroy cursed objects. And of course, Snape is the unequivocal expert in the obscurest Dark Arts, Voldemorts favourite field. :) Valky From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 03:39:18 2007 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 03:39:18 -0000 Subject: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD/ HBP potions book and diary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165482 > > Lealess: > I have my doubts about the Avada Kedavra spell being genuine, or > being the cause of Dumbledore's death. Amiable Dorsai: Boy, much as I despise Snape, I hope you're wrong. If Snape didn't really kill Dumbledore, it cheapens the scene. If Snape is really DDM, a possibility I must reluctantly concede, killing his mentor and only real supporter--at his mentor's request--is one of those supreme moments of moral choice--it's Rick giving up Ilsa, or Huck Finn deciding to go to hell than turn his friend Jim over to the slavecatchers. If Snape is not DDM, then Dumbledore is undone by one of his own greatest vitues--his willingness to forgive and to offer second chances. Either way, it's one of the most powerful scenes in English literature. If Rowling doesn't cheapen it, the Death of Dumbledore will be discussed in literature classes for years. Amiable Dorsai From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 04:12:23 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 04:12:23 -0000 Subject: Bill and Snape and Horcruxes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165483 > Valky wrote (in reference to a query on why Bill and Snape had been said by Carol to be the only people able to help Harry locate and assist with Horcruxes): > The answer to your question is that Bill Weasley is a professional > Curse Breaker so he might be able to make himself useful in a quest to > destroy cursed objects. > > And of course, Snape is the unequivocal expert in the obscurest Dark > Arts, Voldemorts favourite field. Goddlefrood: This bears some scrutiny, and by the way, I think the initial questioner is somewhat aghast, as I am, that it has been suggested Bill and Snape would be the only people able to assist Harry. As a further aside I severely doubt it having read a good number of Carol's posts. Be that as it may there is a candidate, whose abilities are as yet unknown, but who undoubtedly is versed in Horcruxes, and that is Horace Slughorn. He whose mistake (as he sees it) led to TR alias LV making multiple Horcruxes and ultimately putting Harry on the spot. I am of the firm view that Horace will play a significant role in neutralising / destroying the Horcruxes to the point where his inherent fence sitting and looking for an easy life is destroyed. Harry is aware through his experiences in the Pensieve throughout HBP that Horace has knowledge of Horcruxes. It would be no surprise if the first time they are raised in DH outside the trio will be when Harry speaks to Horace. In respect of Snape assisting I would only say that if he does it will be off radar and it is quite possible that it will never come to Harry's attention and therefore neither would it come to ours. Can anyone envisage a scenario where Harry and Snape team up early in the book and Harry accepts help from he whom he currently considers to be the worst and most repulsive murderer in history bar none. I have to say, I really don't think so, but then I've been wrong before. Goddlefrood From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 27 04:06:15 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:06:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the trivial and the profound/Dumbledore's attitude References: Message-ID: <007b01c75a24$a107bd70$129e400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165484 "sistermagpie" Wrote: > >> I don't think seeing Harry's faking >> his ability at Potions as dishonest >> has to come from a love of criticizing Harry. Eggplant: > Don't be silly, of course people love to criticize Harry! Do you > honestly think this thread would be one tenth as long as it is if > Draco had done it, or Snape? And Harry wasn't faking; he really could > make better potions than anybody else in the class. Magpie: I don't really know what people would be saying if Draco or Snape had done it--perhaps you would be among those in the thread saying it was a bad thing if Snape or Draco did it, but that really doesn't matter. What you feel about how people like or don't like to criticize the characters doesn't change that sometimes people judge situations differently than you do. It doesn't have to be because they just love to criticize Harry no matter what or have something against him. No one is accusing Harry of not making his own Potions. Harry himself knows that he's covering up something. He knows Slughorn thinks he's better at it and knows more than he does. Since this is something he shouldn't be guilty of at all, according to you, I don't know why it should be terrible to say it out loud. If it's so important that Harry really be as good at Potions as Slughorn thinks he is so he isn't lying at all, too bad he's not. He's just passively allowing somebody to think something about him he knows is untrue. I don't think that's so harsh a criticism. He might be working to cover that up with Slughorn, but he doesn't seem to be telling himself any different. Eggplant: Harry has forgiven Ron so I guess > I should too, but what I want to know is, did Ron get that free > pass from the same place that Snape did? What do Snape and > Ron have in common? Magpie: Based on what you've just said I'd say I think the question of how Ron gets a free pass lies more with you than it does with readers or the book, because as you've described it here and elsewhere "free pass" is bound up with your personal reactions to situations in canon not matching with someone else's. So what Snape and Ron have in common is that they bother you more than they bother some (but not all) other people. The same is true when people say "How come people are so quick to criticize the Slytherins and say they're evil when Harry/the Twins/Hermione/whoever gets a free pass when they do something bad?" It's not an objective question, because "free pass" is usually a way of describing a reaction to a character other people have that one thinks is undeserved. I've seen Ron totally villified for the fight in GoF, predicted to be a traitor, a monster, etc. so I think this, like every other opinion about every character, is shared by quite a few people. Valky: "For the Last Time" said Harry, speaking in a slightly hoarse whisper after three quarters of an hour silence, "I am not giving back this book, I've learned more from the Half-Blood Prince than Snaepe or Slughorn have taught me in -" **Harry is cut of by Hermione** --Ch 15 HBP-- Which clearly demonstrates Harry's concious intent to learn, not merely copy for the sake of academic credit, from the notes in the book. Magpie: I think everyone acknowledges that Harry wants the book to learn from--he's just not interested in learning Potions theory from it. He's learning lots of spells and other things. The book is very valuable. Harry's experience in Potions class is just a side-effect of that. Valky: Another benefit of Harry using the HBP's notes which hasn't been noted before is that it prevented Draco the only major contender besides Hermione, from winning the Felix elicis at his first Potions lesson, imbibing the lot and managing to kill Dumbledore before Harry had even heard of Merope Gaunt, let alone a Horcrux. FWIW. Magpie: Ah, but who's to say that wouldn't have been better for Draco if he won it? "Luck" would not necessarily have led him to killing Dumbledore, especially since his heart wasn't in the task. Perhaps FF would have given Draco a lucky break that would have led to a better solution. Luck's tricky that way.:-) > Magpie: > I don't see that it really matters whether an academic advantage is foremost > in Harry's mind when he does it. It seems like you're whole argument is that > things like academic honesty are petty when you're a guy like Harry who's > got the weight of the world on his shoulders. And that's a possible > position, but these things being "petty" in Harry's eyes doesn't mean > Harry's not taking the easy way over the right way in his Potions class > sixth year. Lupinlore: Ahhh, right versus easy, the babbling of Dumbledore . Yet, what kind of messages is the "epitome of goodness" giving Harry with regard to Sluggy? Magpie: LOL! Hey, I've been trying to find an actual example of right versus easy (where "right" doesn't totally coincide with our hero's nature and so what they want to do anyway) for two books now. Throw me a bone here! Since Dumbledore is pretty much pushing Harry to go use any means necessary on Slughorn to get the memory, I've got to look for my own examples of what he preaches rather than practices. If I waited for Dumbledore to actually give Harry the kind of basic lessons most kids get I'd be out of luck. -m From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 06:48:23 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 06:48:23 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165485 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" wrote: > > zanooda, who intended to end her post with an example of a situation > where someone needs to use a broom instead of Apparition, but > couldn't think of any, probably because of the late hour... Mike: How about the time when the Order comes to pick up Harry at the Dursleys. Now Harry couldn't Apparate yet, but one of the Order surely could have taken him side-along. Except..., they were trying to minimize the amount of magic they were using, plus they needed to bring Harry's trunk which I don't think you can do when you Apparate. Add to that where they were going (12 GP) required an outside approach which probably also means the trunk couldn't have been magicked there, at least not to inside the house. Unlike when DD sent Harry's trunk to the Weasleys remote and secluded locale, sending Harry's trunk into the city with magic isn't a good idea. Does this qualify, Zanooda? :-) Mike, thinking broom flying sounds a whole lot more fun than Apparating, and besides, why not enjoy the view? Ya can't do that while squeezing through a garden hose/hosepipe. From iam.kemper at gmail.com Tue Feb 27 06:55:52 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:55:52 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD/ HBP potions book and diary In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40702262255i696cd719iee65a3c2c7fc2fb@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165486 > > > Lealess: > > I have my doubts about the Avada Kedavra spell being genuine, or > > being the cause of Dumbledore's death. > > Amiable Dorsai: > Boy, much as I despise Snape, I hope you're wrong. If Snape didn't > really kill Dumbledore, it cheapens the scene. If Snape is really > DDM, a possibility I must reluctantly concede, killing his mentor and > only real supporter--at his mentor's request--is one of those supreme > moments of moral choice... > > If Snape is not DDM, then Dumbledore is undone by one of his own > greatest vitues--his willingness to forgive and to offer second chances. > > Either way, it's one of the most powerful scenes in English literature. > > If Rowling doesn't cheapen it, the Death of Dumbledore will be > discussed in literature classes for years. Kemper now: That would be a powerful scene. But the books aren't about Snape. If it was Harry that spoon fed the poison to his supporter, to his mentor, it would be just as powerful. Instead of DD trusting Snape, the difference which places the focus back on Harry, is that Harry trusted DD. Why would DD lie to Harry about the potion? To get to the Horcrux. To get closer to vanquishing the Dark Lord. Harry as the unwitting means to DD's knowing and willing sacrifice still makes DD's death powerful, especially at the hands of Harry. Kemper From iam.kemper at gmail.com Tue Feb 27 07:22:19 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:22:19 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40702262322s622b24dagcdb2a28bcf5b9cbf@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165487 > eggplant wrote: > > > One of Snape's "mistakes" led to the death of the Potters, if he > > felt genuine remorse over that it seems odd he would treat their > > only son like shit for 6 years. > > Valky: > HAhaha, good one there Eggplant, you're right. Kemper now: Totally funny! I like how Snape's other 'mistakes' include not only treating the Potter boy like shit for six years but also killing the boy when he had the chance, especially after 'killing' Dumbledore. Hahaha... ahh... that crazy Snapey-poo. I'm crying, it so hilarious. Kemper, wondering where Harry is buried From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Feb 27 07:47:55 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 07:47:55 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound/Dumbledore's attitude In-Reply-To: <007b01c75a24$a107bd70$129e400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165489 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > Valky (prviously): > "For the Last Time" said Harry, speaking in a slightly hoarse > whisper after three quarters of an hour silence, "I am not giving > back this book, I've learned more from the Half-Blood Prince than > Snape or Slughorn have taught me in -" > **Harry is cut off by Hermione** > --Ch 15 HBP-- > > Which clearly demonstrates Harry's concious intent to learn, not > merely copy for the sake of academic credit, from the notes in the > book. > Magpie: > I think everyone acknowledges that Harry wants the book to learn > from-- Valky: So why draw the line at acknoweldging that this is why he hides the book and covers up the reason why he is doing so well at potions ? Rather than assuming that he is doing it for the purpose of protecting his reputation. > Magpie: > he's just not interested in learning Potions theory from it. If that's true then why is he comparing it to his *Potions* teachers? Magpie: > He's learning lots of spells and other things. The book is very > valuable. Harry's experience in Potions class is just a side-effect > of that. I'm not sure about that, by the read of the above quote it does seem to be that as far as Harry is concerned he *has* _learned_ things about Potions, retained the information from HBP's notes and possibly even independently applied it in study and that at least some of his performance in Potions class is a direct effect of his effort in studying the Snape's margins. Of course if that's true I don't think we see a precise canon example, I am speculating. That said, I don't see this flat out contradicted in canon either, and In Chapter 11 we are told that the HRH are "studying as though they had exams every day". > Valky: > Another benefit of Harry using the HBP's notes which hasn't been > noted before is that it prevented Draco the only major contender > besides Hermione, from winning the Felix elicis at his first Potions > lesson, imbibing the lot and managing to kill Dumbledore before > Harry had even heard of Merope Gaunt, let alone a Horcrux. FWIW. > > Magpie: > Ah, but who's to say that wouldn't have been better for Draco if he > won it? "Luck" would not necessarily have led him to killing > Dumbledore, especially since his heart wasn't in the task. Valky: In the end when he faced Dumbledore one on one, yes, his heart wasn't in doing the task in cold blood, but he *was* up to sending the Opal necklace, Poisoning the drink, fixing the wardrobe to allow the DE's into Hogwarts. These were all things he might have applied Luck to while his heart *was* in saving his parents lives however he could; using unforgivables, putting the deadly necklace into unsuspecting hands; Don't forget how much Harry likened himself to Voldemort when he was using the FF to get a memory from Slughorn, surely that shows that Luck doesn't care if your steps are morally justified, it wouldn't have changed the things Draco was willing to do. Valky From iam.kemper at gmail.com Tue Feb 27 08:22:07 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:22:07 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bill and Snape and Horcruxes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40702270022j6a77a0cfk3db47a8800915e3f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165490 > > Valky wrote: > > The answer to your question is that Bill Weasley is a professional > > Curse Breaker so he might be able to make himself useful in a quest to > > destroy cursed objects. > > > > And of course, Snape is the unequivocal expert in the obscurest Dark > > Arts ... > > Goddlefrood responded: > > ... there is a candidate, whose abilities are as yet > unknown, but who undoubtedly is versed in Horcruxes, and that is Horace > Slughorn. ... > > I am of the firm view that Horace will play a significant role in > neutralising / destroying the Horcruxes to the point where his inherent > fence sitting and looking for an easy life is destroyed. ... > > In respect of Snape assisting I would only say that if he does it will > be off radar and it is quite possible that it will never come to > Harry's attention and therefore neither would it come to ours. ... Kemper now: You're right that Horace knows of horcruxes, but I doubt he'd be helpful in destroying any. He is a wizard who enjoys an easy life and seems to have little experience in crisis situations (see Ron's poisoning). Besides, it's not the horcrux that's difficult to destroy, it is the curses surrounding the Horcrux... or so I suspect. The diary was relatively easy to destroy (fang through Tom's journal entries). Once DD got past the curse(s) of the ring all he /seemed/ to do in order to destroy the horcrux was to crack the stone setting. I can see Bill helping to decurse/uncurse (it's late) a Horcrux with Harry. I do see Snape destroying a Horcrux off-page. So that when the battle between Harry and Voldie occurs, Harry will be under the assumption that there is one more Horcrux left. That being the theorized case, I can see Harry more willing to kill Voldemort as Harry would believe that he wasn't truly killing Voldie because he'd believe there was another Horcrux. Am I rambling? Kemper, tired and off to bed From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Feb 27 14:50:38 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:50:38 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165491 Eggplant: > One of Snape's "mistakes" led to the death of the Potters, if he felt > genuine remorse over that it seems odd he would treat their only son > like shit for 6 years. Pippin: And being nice to Harry would make up for it? Eurgh!! If Harry could be told what Snape had done, it might be different, but he wasn't supposed to find out. And Harry is a good kid -- if Snape was nice, or even just tough but fair like McGonagall, Harry would think Snape was okay. And Snape would no more have earned it than Harry has earned his rep as a potions genius, even if Snape was the best teacher Harry ever had. If Snape's conscience burns him every time he thinks about his role in the death of the Potters and the Longbottoms, would he really want Harry's innocent, unknowing affection and respect? Or Neville's? How could he possibly bear it? I wonder if it feels so good to provoke their hatred because he thinks, way deep down inside, that he deserves it. Nah, that couldn't be it. Could it? Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Feb 27 15:08:41 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:08:41 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound/Dumbledore's attitude In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165493 > > Valky: > In the end when he faced Dumbledore one on one, yes, his heart wasn't > in doing the task in cold blood, but he *was* up to sending the Opal > necklace, Poisoning the drink, fixing the wardrobe to allow the DE's > into Hogwarts. These were all things he might have applied Luck to > while his heart *was* in saving his parents lives however he could; > using unforgivables, putting the deadly necklace into unsuspecting > hands; Don't forget how much Harry likened himself to Voldemort when > he was using the FF to get a memory from Slughorn, surely that shows > that Luck doesn't care if your steps are morally justified, it > wouldn't have changed the things Draco was willing to do. Pippin: If Draco was lucky, he'd have fixed the cabinet straightaway, and he wouldn't have needed the necklace or the poison. If the Death Eaters had entered the castle during one of Dumbledore's earlier excursions, he would have returned unpoisoned and well able to deal with whatever Draco and his crew could throw at him. All through canon, Harry's been drawn to things that might not be good for him: the Mirror of Erised, the Diary, his parents' voices in PoA, the dreams in OOP. The HBP book is another example. Yet these are all things that were or could be useful *if* Harry used them responsibly. But using them as a security blanket or a substitute for relationships with real people -- ahh, that's a bit too much like Tom Riddle for my comfort. Pippin From funkeginger at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 09:15:19 2007 From: funkeginger at yahoo.com (ginger mabayoje) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 01:15:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower/ He cant find all four Horkeys in just one book. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <521735.15636.qm@web37003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165494 I don't think that Snape is really bad or that he killed DD on the tower like we think he did. I think that Snape knew that if he lived after drinking that potion, if DD was not killed soon that somehow You Know Who would find out. I also think that Snape will help Harry in the end to kill You Know Who. Do you guys think that this is the last book? I don't, I don't think that everything can be done in one book. For the following reasons: One Harry can't find all four Horcruxes in just one book and kill the seven pieces of V soul, it can't be done. The Deathly Hallows is only going to be about 780 pages or anyway JKR does not pass that number of pages. How can she just jam everything together and just be done? I want to see what happens to Harry and Ron an Hogwarts after they kill You Know Who. It will take him a long time to find the Horcruxes, look how long DD was looking for them, give or take five years. He needs some help with his fighting skills, he can't take on V with just the disarming spell and the half-blood spell, he needs a lot of help to be able to fight V. Look how V and DD were fighting in book five. They had real skills. He also needs more skills to find those Horcruxes. Look what happened to DD. He was one of the most powerful wizards and he was really weakened by that poison. If DD did not drink that stuff Snape would never have been able to kill him. Last but not least, I don't think everything could just add up in one book like who is RAB and why did DD trust Snape so much. And would like to still find out what happens when people go through the Veil. funkeginger From funkeginger at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 09:35:46 2007 From: funkeginger at yahoo.com (ginger mabayoje) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 01:35:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black/ who's RAB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <179677.32042.qm@web37006.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165496 I don't think that RAB is Sirius' brother Regulus because then Kreacher could not obey Harry. I think that RAB is someone who knew DD well and was also already a skilled wizard. What do you guys think of the theory that RAB is DD's brother Aberforth? They only mention him briefly in the 5th book and he might be a bit weird but Harry needs all the help he can get. Aberforth is DD's brother, maybe DD told him somthing he can tell us. Plus he can teach Harry some spell to help him and it seems like he is in hiding because we do not really hear that much about him in the books. funkeginger From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 15:50:17 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:50:17 -0000 Subject: Bill and Snape and Horcruxes In-Reply-To: <383187.83693.qm@web55401.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165497 Carol earlier: > > But Snape is probably the only person aside from Bill Weasley who can help Harry with Horcruxes and the only one who can help him locate them. > sweetophelia wrote: > Hi, I'm new here. Perhaps this comment refers to a previous thread? If not, could you please explain your reasoning behind Bill and Snape being the only ones who can help Harry with the Horcruxes? Thanks. Carol responds: I'm not sure that the comment applies to any particular thread, but it reflects my own assumptions, which I'm assuming are familiar to fellow list members who have been around for awhile. To be brief, Bill Weasley is a professional Curse Breaker. We haven't seen him at work, but I expect his specialty to come in handy in DH. Since the ring Horcrux had a curse on it, it seems likely that the locket (which most of us assume is the same one that no one could open in OoP) and probably the cup and Ravenclaw Horcruxes, are similarly protected. So, just as I expect to see Charlie Weasley doing something related to dragons in DH, I expect to see Bill Weasely doing a bit of curse-breaking (and possibly a bit of liaisoning with Ragnok and the other goblins, to follow up on a dropped name in OoP). As for Snape, the Dark Arts/DADA expert and Healer, not to mention Dumbledore's link to Voldemort, who saved Dumbledore from the curse on the ring Horcrux, who is more likely than he to know about Horcruxes? In fact, given his Dark Arts expertise and knowledge of Voldemort's vaparization, in combination with Dumbledore's frequent expeditions in HBP and the curse on the ring (which he surely saw when he was saving DD), how can he not know about Horcruxes? In the unlikely event that Dumbledore, who trusts him *completely* and wants his help and only his after he drinks the poison in the cave, has not told him about the Horcruxes, surely Snape, famous for putting two and two together, has figured it out. Carol, who recently posted her reasons for believing that Snape is Dumbledore's man through and through if you're interested: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165367 From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Feb 27 15:53:17 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:53:17 -0000 Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black/ who's RAB In-Reply-To: <179677.32042.qm@web37006.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165498 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, ginger mabayoje wrote: > > I don't think that RAB is Sirius' brother Regulus because then Kreacher could not obey Harry. I think that RAB is someone who knew DD well and was also already a skilled wizard. What do you guys think of the theory that RAB is DD's brother Aberforth? They only mention him briefly in the 5th book and he might be a bit weird but Harry needs all the help he can get. > > Aberforth is DD's brother, maybe DD told him somthing he can tell us. Plus he can teach Harry some spell to help him and it seems like he is in hiding because we do not really hear that much about him in the books. > > funkeginger > Hickengruendler: If RAB were Aberforth, then why didn't Albus know, that the locket wasn't in the cave anymore. Surely he hadn't drunk that liquid, if he knew it was in vain? But it being an Ex-Deatheater, who doesn't dare to go to Dumbledore, makes sense to me. And yes, I think it is Regulus. Whoever RAB is, does not necessarily have to be alive. He could have stolen the Horcrux anytime, even 20 years ago. Remember that RAB wrote, that he's sure he would not live much longer anymore. That said, I think it's likely that Aberforth has the Horcrux now. I assume it was the locket last seen at 12 Grimmauld Place and was among the stuff Mundungus Fletcher stole there and sold Aberforth. From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 27 15:52:23 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:52:23 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound/Dumbledore's attitude In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165499 > > Valky (prviously): > > "For the Last Time" said Harry, speaking in a slightly hoarse > > whisper after three quarters of an hour silence, "I am not giving > > back this book, I've learned more from the Half-Blood Prince than > > Snape or Slughorn have taught me in -" > > **Harry is cut off by Hermione** > > --Ch 15 HBP-- > > > > Which clearly demonstrates Harry's concious intent to learn, not > > merely copy for the sake of academic credit, from the notes in the > > book. > > > Magpie: > > I think everyone acknowledges that Harry wants the book to learn > > from-- > > Valky: > So why draw the line at acknoweldging that this is why he hides the > book and covers up the reason why he is doing so well at potions ? > Rather than assuming that he is doing it for the purpose of protecting > his reputation. Magpie: I don't think it is "drawing the line." I think it's describing what Harry is doing. If you mean that Harry hides the book after Sectumsempra in order to protect his reputation, I never said that he did. I think he hides the book so that Snape won't take it away. Once he hides the book he no longer uses it in class. Having the book was never dependent on faking his reputation in Potions or covering it up. When push came to shove he chose protecting the book over doing better than everyone else in class. Harry's never forced to accept specific praise he himself knows is undeserved. I have acknowledged that Harry has an intent to learn from the book. That says nothing about reputations false or otherwise. > > Magpie: > > he's just not interested in learning Potions theory from it. Valky: > > If that's true then why is he comparing it to his *Potions* teachers? Magpie: Because it's a Potions book and Snape and Slughorn are his Potions teachers and he's making the point that he learns more from the book than he does from awful Snape, setting up the irony that the book is Snape, and that some of the stuff he credits the Prince he's learned in Potions class. Harry talks about what he's learned from the book a lot, and it doesn't seem to ever have anything to do with Potions theory. Rather he's mostly talking about the spells he's learned spells from it. And the bezoars which, ironically, he had already been taught and he learned finally in sixth year instead of the more advanced thing he was supposed to be studying. It's not like the book makes him understand Galpalott's Law. In that quote to Hermione I don't see Harry denying this. In fact, if Harry had learned from the book without putting Hermione's nose out of joint by taking the top spot in class she feels she earned more honestly and accepting praise for being better at something than she is when he isn't (Hermione has no problem acknowledging that Harry truly is better in DADA), he might not be having to have this argument with her anyway. Regardless, his point here is "Shut up Hermione, I want my book" not "Shut up, Hermione, you're just jealous that I'm better at Potions than you are because the Prince has taught me so well." > Magpie: > > He's learning lots of spells and other things. The book is very > > valuable. Harry's experience in Potions class is just a side- effect > > of that. Valky: > I'm not sure about that, by the read of the above quote it does seem > to be that as far as Harry is concerned he *has* _learned_ things > about Potions, retained the information from HBP's notes and possibly > even independently applied it in study and that at least some of his > performance in Potions class is a direct effect of his effort in > studying the Snape's margins. Of course if that's true I don't think > we see a precise canon example, I am speculating. That said, I don't > see this flat out contradicted in canon either, and In Chapter 11 we > are told that the HRH are "studying as though they had exams every day". Magpie: Harry still knows that he's lying by ommission whenever Slughorn says exactly what Harry is doing and what Harry is demonstrating. And that's not some huge crime that's worse than murder. But I don't understand why it's being denied as if it's insulting to Harry crazy talk either. That's what I don't get. I've agreed that there's nothing wrong in Harry studying the book, I've never suggested his main reason for wanting to keep the book is to advance his academic reputation. I've said that that's a side-product. He even gives it up when he thinks using it to do better in class might put the book itself in danger (suggesting keeping the book isn't dependent on keeping up his performance). But when Slughorn gushes over what a natural he is at Potions, how he understands Potions so well and gets great ideas based on his own knowledge of Potions, perhaps inherited from his mother, when he praises Harry to the other students as being better than they are on an even playing field, Harry knows that's not true and let's Slughorn think that. That's the part I don't understand denying or being defensive about. > > Valky: > > Another benefit of Harry using the HBP's notes which hasn't been > > noted before is that it prevented Draco the only major contender > > besides Hermione, from winning the Felix elicis at his first Potions > > lesson, imbibing the lot and managing to kill Dumbledore before > > Harry had even heard of Merope Gaunt, let alone a Horcrux. FWIW. > > > > Magpie: > > Ah, but who's to say that wouldn't have been better for Draco if he > > won it? "Luck" would not necessarily have led him to killing > > Dumbledore, especially since his heart wasn't in the task. > > > Valky: > In the end when he faced Dumbledore one on one, yes, his heart wasn't > in doing the task in cold blood, but he *was* up to sending the Opal > necklace, Poisoning the drink, fixing the wardrobe to allow the DE's > into Hogwarts. These were all things he might have applied Luck to > while his heart *was* in saving his parents lives however he could; > using unforgivables, putting the deadly necklace into unsuspecting > hands; Don't forget how much Harry likened himself to Voldemort when > he was using the FF to get a memory from Slughorn, surely that shows > that Luck doesn't care if your steps are morally justified, it > wouldn't have changed the things Draco was willing to do. Magpie: When Dumbledore says Draco's heart wasn't in the task he is referring to the necklace and the poison. He was not suggesting that Draco's heart was fine until he had to kill Dumbledore face to face. Of course I see your point in saying that the Luck Potion might have worked out in a bad way for our guys if Draco was using it. I'm saying that the nature of Luck is far too slippery to assume we could apply it this way. If Draco's heart was really in saving his parents but not in murdering Dumbledore fantastic "luck" might have solved both those for him. He might not have to do what he didn't want to do, and yet find a way to do what he did want to do. (Pippin gives a good example in Draco's fixing the Cabinet earlier.) The nature of luck is you can't always tell what was lucky until later. You might think it was unlucky that you missed your bus, and then later found out the bus crashed. -m From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 14:45:26 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:45:26 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound/Dumbledore's attitude In-Reply-To: <007b01c75a24$a107bd70$129e400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165500 > > Magpie: > > I don't see that it really matters whether an academic advantage > > is foremost in Harry's mind when he does it. It seems like you're > > whole argument is that things like academic honesty are petty > > when you're a guy like Harry who's got the weight of the world on > > his shoulders. And that's a possible position, but these things > > being "petty" in Harry's eyes doesn't mean Harry's not taking the > > easy way over the right way in his Potions class sixth year. > Lupinlore: > Ahhh, right versus easy, the babbling of Dumbledore . Yet, what > kind of messages is the "epitome of goodness" giving Harry with > regard to Sluggy? > Magpie: > LOL! Hey, I've been trying to find an actual example of right > versus easy (where "right" doesn't totally coincide with our hero's > nature and so what they want to do anyway) for two books now. Throw > me a bone here! Bone thrown! Let us consider this a little more deeply, however. In the above snippets, we go at this as if the two situations -- Harry "concealing" the source of his potions prowess and Harry trying to get the memory, are two unrelated questions. And they are never explicitly brought together, it is true. Yet, are they really separate? What is the basis of Sluggy's positive attitude to Harry? Largely Harry's fame, but Harry's "talent" in his class certainly greases the wheels to a huge degree, making Sluggy even more favorably disposed to Harry. Thus the one situation is part and parcel of the other. What would DD say, if you pinned his slippery hide to the wall? He might well concede that, given his goal of retrieving the memory, that Sluggy's positive view of Harry's potions skills is all for the best. This in the event that the whole HBP book episode was not part of DD's plan -- which I doubt very much it was. Lupinlore, noting once again as many do that Dumbledore has too many hats on one pointy head. From muellem at bc.edu Tue Feb 27 15:52:27 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:52:27 -0000 Subject: The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black/ who's RAB In-Reply-To: <179677.32042.qm@web37006.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165501 ginger mabayoje wrote: > > I don't think that RAB is Sirius' brother Regulus because then Kreacher could not obey Harry. I think that RAB is someone who knew DD well and was also already a skilled wizard. What do you guys think of the theory that RAB is DD's brother Aberforth? They only mention him briefly in the 5th book and he might be a bit weird but Harry needs all the help he can get. > > Aberforth is DD's brother, maybe DD told him somthing he can tell us. Plus he can teach Harry some spell to help him and it seems like he is in hiding because we do not really hear that much about him in the books. colebiancardi here: The note stated "To The Dark Lord" - only a DeathEater would call Voldy "The Dark Lord". I don't think Aberforth was a DE; RAB can be Regulus(my current opinion) and I don't think it matters whether he is alive or dead for the Kreacher bit. Sirius made out his last will which gave everything to Harry. If Regulus is alive, but is under an enchantment that DD created and that enchantment makes it look to everyone else, including Kreacher, that Regulus is dead, I could see how Sirius's will was honored. Afterall, doesn't DD state something to the effect that "Sirius did know what he was doing, afterall" when Kreacher was forced to obey Harry? just food for thought. colebiancarid From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 16:15:58 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 16:15:58 -0000 Subject: Lying vs Murder (was:Re: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165502 DA (Mike as Devil's Advocate) wrote: > But doesn't Harry's potion genius rep cause Slughorn to make the connection between Harry and Lily? Doesn't this later allow Harry to play off the supposed connection when he's trying to worm that memory out of Slughorn? Carol responds: Actually, no. Slughorn makes the connection between Harry and Lily based on their eyes when he and Harry first meet: "'Except for your eyes. You've got--' "'My mother's eyes. Yeah.' . . . . "'Hmpf. Yes, well. You shouldn't have favorites as a teacher of course but she was one of mine. Your mother . . . . Lily Evans. One of the brightest I ever taught. Vivacious, you know. Charming girl. I used to tell her she should have been in my House. [Hm. Why hasn't anyone commented on Lily's Slytherin tendencies?] Very cheeky answers I used to get back too." (HBP Am. ed. 19-20) So, in contrast to Snape and Sirius Black, who are apparently looking for James in Harry, guilt-stricken Slughorn is looking for Lily in Harry: "cheek," Potions ability, and all. And since he has her eyes, he must have those other traits, just as he has James's "arrogance" and recklessness, right? The adults see what they expect, and want, to see. And Slughorn is already interested in "collecting" Harry before he sees his supposed Potions brilliance, which is how DD lures him into accepting the Potions position. As for Harry's false reputation as Potions genius (surely you conced, Mike, that the Potions genius is Teen!Snape) ostensibly leading to his acquiring the memory, the unintended consequences of an action don't make the action itself right or wrong--and the consequences *are* unntended--Harry doesn't start taking credit for the HBP's brilliance intending to get a memory he doesn't yet know about from Slughorn. And even if he did, the end doesn't justify the means. But choices and actions have unintended consequences in the HP books (as in RL) that have nothing to do with the rightness or wrongness of the choice itself. Harry's preventing Lupin and Black from murdering Pettigrew leads (along with Lupin's transformation) to Pettigrew's escape. That doesn't make Harry's action in preventing his father's friends from committing murder wrong. Snape's eavesdropping, Pettigrew's betrayal of the Potters, and Voldemort's murder of Lily lead to Voldemort's vaporization and Harry's becoming the Chosen One. Those unintended good consequences don't make the actions that led to them good or right. Nor do the good consequences attained as the result of Harry's "winning" the Felix Felicis through academic dishonesty make the academic dishonesty right. If Hermione had won it, as she deserved to do, she might well have given it to Harry, who needed it more than she did. And if she hadn't, he'd simply have had to use his wits to get the memory. (Felix Felicis in itself could be regarded as a kind of cheating, which is why its use, like the use of steroids in the Muggle world, is banned in athletic competitions and exams.) In any case, it's Slughorn's guilt over Lily's death, not Harry's Potions genius reputation, that leads him to yield up the memory after Harry gets him drunk. Harry takes advantage of Slughorn's fondness for Lily and his remorse over his part in her death (providing information on Horcruxes to Tom Riddle, who otherwise would not have known that murder splits the soul and a soul bit can be encased in a Horcrux, anchoring the main soul to the earth. That information is not available from the Hogwarts library, as we know). Carol, deleting her original sign off, which was more unkind than clever, and apologizing to Mike From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 16:24:21 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 16:24:21 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's attitude (was Re: On lying and cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165503 Lupinlore wrote: > Ahhh, right versus easy, the babbling of Dumbledore . Yet, what kind of messages is the "epitome of goodness" giving Harry with regard to Sluggy? Still, DD gives Harry many messages with regard to Sluggy, and they aren't ones that emphasize respect and honesty. > > From the very beginning, the attitude DD evinces toward Sluggy seems to one of disrespect and, let's face it, condescension. He makes clear at the very beginning that he is using Harry as "bait" to lure Sluggy back to Hogwarts, and tells Harry very specifically to be very careful and wary around his new teacher. Not a very good beginning, if you are thinking of a student/teacher relationship. And who's lead is Harry supposed to follow, that of some mythical "responsible adult" who doesn't exist in his life, or of DD who for all his extreme faults is after all the Headmaster and Sluggy's employer? > > As things events develop during HBP, it becomes clear that DD only wants Sluggy at Hogwarts for the purpose of ferreting out what he knows about Tom Riddle. He indeed makes no bones about it. Once again, not a builder of respect and honesty. And finally, to put the crown on the situation, he makes clear that he is very annoyed at Harry because Harry has not been crafty, manipulative, and dishonest ENOUGH in his dealings with Sluggy. Carol responds: You raise some interesting points here. How can we reconcile "what is right" vs. "what is easy" with the Slytherinish tactics used by Dumbledore to get Slughorn to Hogwarts (balanced by Slughorn's own tactics, including Transfiguring himself into a chair and pretending to have been kidnapped by Death Eaters to avoid going to Hogwarts and yielding up the true memory)? For one thing, I think you're ignoring Dumbledore's other motives in hiring Slughorn, at least one of which is concern for Slughorn's welfare. Just as DD protects Trelawney (who is no great teacher but could be tortured by Voldemort to obtain information on the Prophecy) by keeping her at Hogwarts, he wants to keep Slughorn, who already knows that the DEs may try to recruit him (and probably suspects that he's in danger from Voldemort himself in relation to the memory) in a (seemingly) safe place where he can watch over him and protect him. And, IMO, Dumbledore wants to give the DADA position to the only qualified candidate, Snape (perhaps as part of a longterm plan that involves letting Snape seem to rejoin Voldemort when the DADA curse strikes) and he knows he'll need another Potions Master and Head of Slytherin House when that time comes. So, yes, we do see some cunning on Dumbledore's part as he matches wits with Slughorn (and beats him hands down by playing on his weakness for collecting trophies in the form of students), and we see Dumbledore encouraging Harry to use his own Slytherin side in manipulating Slughorn into getting the memory, which Dumbledore regards as supremely important in the defeat of Voldemort (I suppose because it teaches Harry about Horcruxes--IMO, the importance of that memory is overplayed just as the importance of the Prophecy is in OoP). Are we supposed to think that Slytherinis tactics are not so bad, that cunning in a good cause is not only acceptable but necessary (think DDM!Snape as double agent)? After all, one of Dumbledore's longterm goals is to unite not only the Houses, including Slytherin, but the schools, including Durmstrang, in the war against Voldemort. Are we seeing "the end justifies the means" here, or can this attitude be reconciled with right vs. easy? Frankly, although I like Dumbledore much better than you do, he does seem more than usually manipulative and coercive in this book than the previous five (in part because he knows that Voldemort is back, that Draco is trying to kill him, and that the time available to teach Harry what he needs to know is very short). Carol, who still doesn't approve of Harry the Hero stealing someone else's glory, which has no connection in *Harry's* mind with the war against Voldemort, but fearing that DD and JKR might justify it for exactly those Slytherinish reasons From funkeginger at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 08:39:35 2007 From: funkeginger at yahoo.com (ginger mabayoje) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:39:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bill and Snape and Horcruxes In-Reply-To: <383187.83693.qm@web55401.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <785676.5528.qm@web37014.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165504 justcarol67 wrote: But Snape is probably the only person aside from Bill Weasley who can help Harry with Horcruxes and the only one who can help him locate them. sweetophelia4u says: Hi, I'm new here. Perhaps this comment refers to a previous thread? If not, could you please explain your reasoning behind Bill and Snape being the only ones who can help Harry with the Horcruxes? Thanks. Funkeginger I don't get what you mean that Bill is the only one who can help Harry. I get what you're saying about Snape, the guy's really skilled in all that dark stuff but Bill? I know he's an ok Wizard but Harry's last hope, I don't know about that man. Do you know something about the Deathly Hallows that the rest of us don't know? I don't think that anyone can help Harry out other then RAB whoever that is if they are alive. A friend and I have this belief that Snape really is not bad even through he killed Dumbledore. We think that when Dumbledore was saying "Please Severus" that he was begging for Snape to kill him. Maybe so You Know Who does not find out about the Horcruxes. I mean it's kind of funny Snape saw Dumbledore really weak and not even being able to stand. Logically if you see one of the greatest Wizards of that time so weak and unable to stand, you have to ask yourself how they got that way. Snape was always logical. So I want to know why he did react to the way Dumbledore looked before he killed him. Also how come Dumbledore trusted Snape so much if he did not have a good reason, and two Snape was a Death Eater. Up until he died, Dumbledore had to see Snape right when he got back from the Cave. I don't think that Dumbledore could be that dumb. How could he be wrong and Harry right all these years? I think there was more behind it then and that JK Rowling is a really smart person. I bet she wants everyone to think Snape is bad, but in the end he will help Harry or we will find out what Snape did for Dumbledore to make him trust him so much. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 18:32:40 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 18:32:40 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound/Harry and HBP book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165505 > Magpie: > Harry still knows that he's lying by ommission whenever Slughorn > says exactly what Harry is doing and what Harry is demonstrating. > And that's not some huge crime that's worse than murder. But I don't > understand why it's being denied as if it's insulting to Harry crazy > talk either. That's what I don't get. I've agreed that there's > nothing wrong in Harry studying the book, I've never suggested his > main reason for wanting to keep the book is to advance his academic > reputation. I've said that that's a side-product. He even gives it > up when he thinks using it to do better in class might put the book > itself in danger (suggesting keeping the book isn't dependent on > keeping up his performance). But when Slughorn gushes over what a > natural he is at Potions, how he understands Potions so well and > gets great ideas based on his own knowledge of Potions, perhaps > inherited from his mother, when he praises Harry to the other > students as being better than they are on an even playing field, > Harry knows that's not true and let's Slughorn think that. That's > the part I don't understand denying or being defensive about. > Alla: I think we are probably starting to talk past each other again. Am not Valky of course, so if I am wrong she will correct it. Again, can speak only for myself, but I do **not** see Valky denying anything that you wrote in this paragraph and if I may add, neither do I deny anything you wrote in this paragraph. It was my impression that Valky was denying **other** parts of your argument ( and if that was the case, I agree with her as well). Like for example in this paragraph you wrote that you never suggested that his main reason for keeping the book is to advance his academic reputation, that it is a side product for you. Well, all can I say - great, I agree with it, but this not the impression I got from your other posts on the subject. Sorry that I misunderstood you, because I thought you were arguing that advancing his reputation IS the main reason Harry keeps the book, one of the main reasons anyways. And that I completely disagree with. You are saying that this is not the huge crime worse than murder. Great, we agree again, but Betsy in this thread argued exactly that - that Harry lying to Slughorn **is** worse than murder. I am sorry that I misunderstood her as well, or did not understand the joke. So, what I am trying to say, I really have **no** argument with anything you wrote in this paragraph, but I did not realise that this is what you were arguing in your previous posts on the subject. JMO, Alla From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Feb 27 20:39:17 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 20:39:17 -0000 Subject: Potions!Genius.... Was Lying vs Murder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165506 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > (surely you > concede, Mike, that the Potions genius is Teen!Snape) Valky interjects: Although this question wasn't directed to me I'd just like to note that I actually don't concede this particular point at all. I totally concede spellwriter!Snape (that much is irrefutable canon and besides it's logical considering the implied by Sirius keen interest of Snape in Dark Arts), but I continue to think that there are just that one too many reminders of Lily in the HBP potions results to be completely sure that the original genius behind that was Snape, Severus and nothing but Snape. The fact that Snape and Lily shared a James-less environment in NEWT potions and Slug Club for a year; and the connection between that year and the Pensieve scene which I suppose is a catalytic moment in the dynamic of these 70's Generation classmates, only serves to reinforce the idea and increase the probability that the HBP text was the product of more than one thinker, one of those Lily Potter. For the moment I am happy to allow the assumption that Snape's handwriting = Snape's work fall by the by and have appearances, but I don't make the same assumption at all, personally. FWIW. Valky From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 21:12:46 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:12:46 -0000 Subject: Lying vs Murder (was:Re: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165507 > :: Mike, putting on his horns, affixing his pointed tail and > :: grabbing his pitchfork in preparation to play Devil's Advocate Betsy Hp: Not out (or is it down?) for the count yet... > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > (1) What good is gained? > > Harry's lie causes Slughorn to think Harry is a potions genius. > > But the Order doesn't benefit from that. > > > >>DA aka Mike: > But doesn't Harry's potion genius rep cause Slughorn to make the > connection between Harry and Lily? > Betsy Hp: No. As Carol pointed out, Slughorn was won over by Harry's gorgeous green eyes (just like his mom's!). Slughorn was well under Harry's spell by the time Potions class started. Harry's false knowledge gained him nothing there. > >>Betsy Hp: > > By killing Dumbledore, DDM!Snape sets himself up as totally loyal > > to Voldemort. He has earned Voldemort's trust and is in a better > > position to help bring Voldemort down. > >>DA aka Mike: > Of course this assumes Snape isn't either ESE or OFH. Betsy Hp: Of course it does! This whole shaky structure depends absolutely on Snape being full on DDM. Any other flavor of Snape and the whole thing falls completely apart. Which means the assumption that Snape's actions on the Tower are on Dumbledore's orders and with Dumbledore's blessing is a given throughout. > >>DA aka Mike: > Besides, how much tighter does Snape have to get? Spinner's End > spun a scene wherein Snape is already closer to LV than even Bella, > if you are to believe the Black sisters presentation of the > situation at that time. > How does killing Dumbledore, even on DD's orders, set up the Order > better than having a live Dumbledore? And of how much use to the > Order or Harry is a Snape who is so thoroughly mistrusted now? Betsy Hp: The easy answer is, take it up with Dumbledore. However I'd suggest that Bellatrix's campaign of distrust is working to a certain extent and there are questions about DDM!Snape's ultimate loyalty. Also, just because *Harry* is unaware of DDM!Snape having an Order contact doesn't mean one doesn't exist. > >>Betsy Hp: > > Answer: Good is not gained by Harry's lie. Good is gained by DDM! > > Snape's murder. > >>DA aka Mike: Hah! Betsy Hp: I see you your "ha" and raise you an "*ah*ha". We're still looking at a situation where DDM!Snape's actions gain something for the good guys, while Harry's actions gain them nothing. > >>Betsy Hp: > > (2) Who, if anyone, benefits? > > > > The note about the Bezoar saves Ron's life, but that was not > > dependent on Harry lying about his potion knowledge. > >>DA aka Mike: > No, but using the book for the Bezoar trick (which as everyone has > said, Harry did to perpetuate his "potions genius" rep) caused > Slughorn to have that Bezoar in his personal potions kit. > Betsy Hp: I'll concede that. But it wasn't something Harry planned for. IOWs, it was luck not forethought. (This will be important further down.) > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > But at the same time they morally compromise DDM!Snape > > because he has killed. > >>DA aka Mike: > > And how do you know Snape hasn't killed in the past, not counting > the obvious aiding and abetting on the Potter murders? What's > another notch in your soul amongst friends? Betsy Hp: Part of the DDM!Snape assumption. There's canon that supports non- killer Snape, though being Snape, it's by no means definitive. > >>Betsy Hp: > > Answer: Harry's actions benefit no one. DDM!Snape's actions do > > not benefit DDM!Snape but they do benefit the Order. > >>DA aka Mike: Pshaw I say, pshaw Betsy Hp: I'll give you the bezoar saving Ron's life. So Ron benefits from Harry's lie. However, I don't think you fully support your "pshaw" of the consequences of DDM!Snape's actions. So the contention that DDM!Snape's actions benefit the Order still stands. > >>Betsy Hp: > > (3) Was the action thought out? > > Harry doesn't think about what he is doing. He uses the Prince's > > knowledge and passes it off as his own because it was made easy > > for him to do so. > >>DA aka Mike: > > But how fair is it to condemn Harry for accepting accolades for > potions genius if at the same time you are going to say he isn't > really thinking about it? > Betsy Hp: Incredibly, outrageously, and ridiculously fair. Harry trips and falls into his false reputation of being a potions genius. He hasn't thought about and weighed the costs and benefits, he merely assumes that being known as smart is kind of nice. So not only is Harry morally compromising himself, he's doing so for no apparent reason. And it's fair to judge Harry for both the lie and the sloppy thinking that lead to the lie. > >>Betsy Hp: > > DDM!Snape has contemplated the costs and benefits of committing > > murder to further the Order's cause. He has discussed same with > > Dumbledore himself. > DA aka Mike: > Hah! How do you *know* he's discussed this with DD? That argument > in the forest and Hagrid's recounting of it are hardly conclusive. > Betsy Hp: Nothing about Snape is conclusive. However, since we're going with DDM!Snape here we must assume full out loyalty with Dumbledore. Which means Dumbledore knows about the Vow, and which means discussions were had on how to handle it. And of course DDM!Snape would be horrified at the thought of murdering his mentor. > >>DA aka Mike: > Oh and of course, I must mention that Snape backed himself into > the corner and *had* to kill DD because of the Vow. > Betsy Hp: DDM!Snape could have, and being DDM would have preferred to, kill himself. Jump off the Tower, and the Vow is no longer an issue. So DDM!Snape isn't *forced* into a decision; he makes his decision because it benefits the greater good. > >>Betsy Hp: > > Conclusion: > > While Harry is acting in a selfish and thoughtless manner to the > > benefit of no one, Snape is acting in a self-sacrificing, > > thoughtful manner with benefit to good. So in this specific > > case, lying is worse than murder. > >>DA aka Mike: > Sorry, but you have a lot of questions to answer before you get > to make these claims, whoever you are. Betsy Hp: The only fly you manged to flick into my iced tea is that Ron does benefit from Harry's lie. But because Harry doesn't lie *in order to* save Ron's life, it's an unintended consequence that gives little commendation to Harry. There's still nothing to suggest that Harry lied for well thought out reasons. There's nothing to suggest that Harry's lie helped further the cause of good against evil. But on the other hand, DDM!Snape is still killing with for a reasoned and beneficial purpose. So the conclusion remains: Harry's lie is worse than DDM!Snape's murder. Betsy Hp (pointing out to Mike that he hit a *girl*, a girl wearing *glasses*, no less. ) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 21:42:28 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:42:28 -0000 Subject: Potions!Genius.... Was Lying vs Murder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165509 Carol earlier: > > (surely you concede, Mike, that the Potions genius is Teen!Snape) > > Valky interjects: > Although this question wasn't directed to me I'd just like to note that I actually don't concede this particular point at all. I totally concede spellwriter!Snape (that much is irrefutable canon and besides it's logical considering the implied by Sirius keen interest of Snape in Dark Arts), but I continue to think that there are just that one too many reminders of Lily in the HBP potions results to be completely sure that the original genius behind that was Snape, Severus and nothing but Snape. The fact that Snape and Lily shared a James-less environment in NEWT potions and Slug Club for a year; and the connection between that year and the Pensieve scene which I suppose is a catalytic moment in the dynamic of these 70's Generation classmates, only serves to reinforce the idea and increase the probability that the HBP text was the product of more than one thinker, one of those Lily Potter. > > For the moment I am happy to allow the assumption that Snape's handwriting = Snape's work fall by the by and have appearances, but I don't make the same assumption at all, personally. FWIW. > Carol responds: What "fact" that Severus and Lily shared "a James-less environment" in Slughorn's NEWT Potions class? Slughorn presumably took E students then as he does now, not just "the very best" like Snape. Are you suggesting that Head Boy James, referred to by Lupin and McGonagall (IIRC) as the best in his year wasn't in Slughorn's NEWT Potions class (or the Slug Club despite his obvious talents in other classes)? I'm not sure that 's a safe assumption, and I don't know of any canon whatever to back it up. the closest I can find is Lupin saying that *he* wasn't good in Potions, and maybe even he scraped an E: He's just not a Potions genius like Snape, who can make the Wolfbane Potion perfectly every time and has all the Potions memorized, even to the point of knowing which step has been missed to cause a potion to turn orange instead of green (and various other examples). The similarity of the handwritng in Severus's DADA exam and the HBP's book is, IMO, an important clue, and the Potions hints are in the same writing as the spells and as "This book is the Property of the Half-Blood Prince," suggesting that Harry is right in believing that they're all the products of the same brilliant mind. Moreover, we've had strong evidence since SS/PS that Snape is a Potions genius, and this is our first hint that Lily was also good in the subject. So, BTW, is Hermione, but she's not a genius. Snape, who created those curtains of fire and their antidotes back in Book 1, clearly is. And even if Potions natural!Lily is not the product of Slughorn's rose-colored memories, why would being in the same class--*after* Severus called Lily a Mud-Blood in frustrated humiliation and she called him Snivellus--make their working together any more than a remote possibility and wishful thinking on the part of Snape/Lily shippers? I think it's been pretty clearly established that the HBP is Snape, not Lily, and you seem to be trying to get as far from a straightforward reading as possible. And the whole point of Harry learning more from the HBP than he has from Snape is that he's still learning from Snape! If he's learning from Lily (assuming that he's learning Potions at all), then he might as well have her genes for Potion-making, as Slughorn wrongly assumes. All the irony is spoiled. And Snape twice teaches his students about Bezoars (in the memorable first lesson and again when he's "forcing" the students to learn antidotes in GoF), so the snarky joke about Bezoars from the HBP is very much in character for him and the stage has been set for it for five books. (I can't picture Lily grabbing Severus's book and writing that line in the margin in his handwriting, sorry--or his copying the line from her. The Snape we know comes up with his own sarcastic comebacks.) That's another irony, BTW: Ron, who hates Snape almost as much as Harry does, owes his life to him--doubly, since the HBP's remark jogs Harry's memory of Snape's first lesson on Bezoars. Carol, thanking Valky for correcting her typo as she really does know how to spell "concede" From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Feb 27 22:19:39 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 22:19:39 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound/Harry and HBP book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165510 > Alla: > > I think we are probably starting to talk past each other again. Am > not Valky of course, so if I am wrong she will correct it. > > Again, can speak only for myself, but I do **not** see Valky denying > anything that you wrote in this paragraph and if I may add, neither > do I deny anything you wrote in this paragraph. > > It was my impression that Valky was denying **other** parts of your > argument ( and if that was the case, I agree with her as well). > > Like for example in this paragraph you wrote that you never suggested > that his main reason for keeping the book is to advance his academic > reputation, that it is a side product for you. > > Well, all can I say - great, I agree with it, but this not the > impression I got from your other posts on the subject. Sorry that I > misunderstood you, because I thought you were arguing that advancing > his reputation IS the main reason Harry keeps the book, one of the > main reasons anyways. And that I completely disagree with. Magpie: I agree with that too. And I also agree that the main problem is that all of us are hearing not just what each other is saying, but what it sounds like we're saying. Because just as I am not saying that Harry's main reason for keeping the book is to gain an academic reputation (since that never even really entered my mind) but it sounded like I was, perhaps other people are not trying to argue that Slughorn's compliments to Harry are accurate and deserved or else not significant at all, which they sometimes approach sounding to me. To me all the stuff about how Harry's learning stuff from the book or has bigger things to think about or isn't primarily interested in besting Hermione and Draco seems like some kind of distraction, because it's irrelevent, imo. I don't see how it would change things even if it was Harry's primary goal--and of course, if that were his goal and he got there by really working on his studies, there would be nothing wrong in that at all. It's not a bad goal by definition! But I agree that it's never much of a desire for Harry. He doesn't particularly like Slughorn's praising him in this way because he knows it's not true and frankly, I don't think he's that confident about always pulling it off. He just would rather have that than explain Slughorn's mistake to him. Alla:> > You are saying that this is not the huge crime worse than murder. > Great, we agree again, but Betsy in this thread argued exactly that - > that Harry lying to Slughorn **is** worse than murder. I am sorry > that I misunderstood her as well, or did not understand the joke. Magpie: She was, but I thought she made it clear she wasn't truly trying to argue that the one crime wasn't worse than the other. She was talking about the possible meanings and motivations for the characters and comparing them--if Snape were DDM and killed him for the good of the cause on Dumbledore's orders. I would say that Snape was still of course committing a far more serious act than Harry is regardless, but I could see the point she was making in the other context. -m From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Feb 27 22:58:55 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 22:58:55 -0000 Subject: Lying and Cheating & Potions!Genius.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165511 **Lying and Cheating** Carol, who still doesn't approve of Harry the Hero stealing someone else's glory, which has no connection in *Harry's* mind with the war against Voldemort, but fearing that DD and JKR might justify it for exactly those Slytherinish reasons Valky: LOL, I think we were warned about this, and if it eventually does happen we weren't conned. Harry would have done well in Slytherin, The Sorting Hat, I assume, still stands by that statement. It's part of who Harry is, the Hero of this story is no sanctimonious form of better, and in fact has certain things in common with, the villains. Isn't that part of the larger appeal of the series? Magpie: I don't think it is "drawing the line." I think it's describing what Harry is doing. If you mean that Harry hides the book after Sectumsempra in order to protect his reputation, I never said that he did. Valky: Actually I meant hiding the book as in changing the covers so that Slughorn wouldn't know he was keeping the old book, and then later not correcting Slughorn when he raves about Harry's performance by saying... "Well you see sir, The text book that you gave me is full of interesting secrets, notes and tricks of the trade and I swapped the covers so you wouldn't know I still had it." Why he hides these secrets is because he'd lose the only book that he's ever been interested in learning from. The only thing he feels he is really able to learn anything from beside Dumbledore, and maybe Hermione (who he notes is so busy studying for her own NEWTs that she's not even able to be the fount that she used to be), in this year. He can't understand McGonagall any more, Snape is teaching the subject Harry usually loves the most so that's basically ruined for him, Slughorn's Potions methods are ultimately the inferior ones, profoundly demonstrated by the notes in the Snape's old text; It *is* in Harry's mind that this book is his opportunity to get better at magic in a situation otherwise not conducive to that purpose at all. Magpie: I think he hides the book so that Snape won't take it away. Once he hides the book he no longer uses it in class. Having the book was never dependent on faking his reputation in Potions or covering it up. Valky: No, that's true, but using the book in class isn't necessarily dependent on Harry putting no effort into learning from it, as I mentioned before. It does follow that he would have missed Golpalotts law by learning from the HBP text notes instead of other texts, because the HBP text has no notes on Golpalott. It doesn't follow that not knowing Golpalotts law means he isn't attempting to learn and understand what he *is* reading in the HBP text. To some degree, it's plausible that his reputation isn't entirely faked, using the book, notes included, as his study text and in class, isn't dependent on him totally faking the knowledge and ability he arrives at through it. Magpie: When push came to shove he chose protecting the book over doing better than everyone else in class. Harry's never forced to accept specific praise he himself knows is undeserved. I have acknowledged that Harry has an intent to learn from the book. Valky: Well yes, he can re-replace the text book and have a second one to use in class or ignore the notes.. which just seems to defeat the purpose of having them. He chooses to practice the hints and study the tips and techniques in Snape's notes. And who knows anyone of those hints or tips could be just the thing to know when he is up against Voldemort. I don't think it's quite right or fair to expect from Harry actions which bear out that he has the luxury of time and an unimpeded focus in which to progress his knowledge like an average student, that is someone elses life, not his. The way I see it is that Harry is rushing things, trying to squeeze everything he can out of a short moment between now and his ultimate showdown with Voldemort, testing the HBP's Potions notes under the supervision of a competent teacher is actually one of his wiser decisions in doing that. Although he's not forced to accept the reputation, allowing it to be makes for expedient progress, and that's what matters to him doesn't it. It's pretty obvious he does not regard a reputation for brilliance even nearly as highly as the people around him do. Take Dumbledore's Army for an example; when his list of triumphs was stated to him he blushed furiously and took pains to point out to the group that a reputation didn't represent a better wizard, when it came to the crunch he had scraped by on his gut instinct and some luck. Not really aware that had given him such a reputation for Dark Arts defense, he was simply shocked to learn that people had assumed as much from his accomplishments. Magpie: That says nothing about reputations false or otherwise. Valky: I think that's true only in the limited context we were talking about before, and I think that context becomes unfair on Harry when it is indulged too adherently, NEWT results are hardly the centre of his universe. Magpie: Regardless, his point here is "Shut up Hermione, I want my book" not "Shut up, Hermione, you're just jealous that I'm better at Potions than you are because the Prince has taught me so well." Valky: But there definitely is some of the latter alternative in the dynamic nonetheless because Harry has offered to share the text notes with Hermione, she might actually have gotten even more out of them than Harry could, but she refused on the grounds of her suspicions about the book's nature. Magpie: Harry still knows that he's lying by ommission whenever Slughorn says exactly what Harry is doing and what Harry is demonstrating. And that's not some huge crime that's worse than murder. But I don't understand why it's being denied as if it's insulting to Harry crazy talk either. That's what I don't get. Valky: Some of it *is* insulting to Harry, crazy talk. :P As I mentioned above. It gets ridiculous when real life scenarios of plagarism and cheating in a context of a fairly normal and not soon-to-be-over life are given. Or even in the context of comparing Snape's actions and motivations when he wrote the notes (which we don't even know) to Harry's actions and motivations in using them. Their lives could not have been more different. Snape was most likely plotting and planning a long life hopefully culminating in an Order of Merlin and other Warlock Council honours. Harry is trying to get good and get it fast in case tomorrow is the day Voldemort comes for him. Two different lives, two different contexts. ****Potions!Genius****** > Carol responds: What "fact" that Severus and Lily shared "a James-less environment" in Slughorn's NEWT Potions class? Slughorn presumably took E students then as he does now, not just "the very best" like Snape. Are you suggesting that Head Boy James, referred to by Lupin and McGonagall (IIRC) as the best in his year wasn't in Slughorn's NEWT Potions class (or the Slug Club despite his obvious talents in other classes)? I'm not sure that 's a safe assumption, and I don't know of any canon whatever to back it up. the closest I can find is Lupin saying that *he* wasn't good in Potions, and maybe even he scraped an E: He's just not a Potions genius ...... Valky: OOps I vaguely remember it being presented as canon that James didn't take NEWT potions, but I may have been wrong about that, mi scusi. But even so, you've got to admit, there is a pretty huge chance that both a and b are true as true can be. NEWT classes are high level classes, James having been non-spectacular at Potions, and a guy who liked to always appear in his best light, add up to a high chance he didn't join that class. As for Slug Club. This is as good as Canon as far as I'm concerened. Sirius refused the Slug Club according to Slughorn, and he and James were attached at the hip both physically and idealisitically. No doubt, it wouldn't matter what James was good at, he wasn't a member of the club his best friend didn't want to be in. Carol: I think it's been pretty clearly established that the HBP is Snape, not Lily, and you seem to be trying to get as far from a straightforward reading as possible. Valky: There's no doubt the HBP is Snape. But Snape wrote the potions notes in the text, and that just means he wrote them there, no more or less than that in and of itself. I don't think what I said was attempting to get away from that. Carol: And the whole point of Harry learning more from the HBP than he has from Snape is that he's still learning from Snape! If he's learning from Lily (assuming that he's learning Potions at all), then he might as well have her genes for Potion-making, as Slughorn wrongly assumes. All the irony is spoiled. Valky: Oh I don't know... how about that spoiling *all* the Irony. On the contrary, it opens up far greater ironies if Lily *is* revealed as the Potions!Genius, from the very first Potions lesson Harry ever had with Snape all the way to the sprig of Peppermint. Carol: And Snape twice teaches his students about Bezoars (in the memorable first lesson and again when he's "forcing" the students to learn antidotes in GoF), so the snarky joke about Bezoars from the HBP is very much in character for him and the stage has been set for it for five books. (I can't picture Lily grabbing Severus's book and writing that line in the margin in his handwriting, sorry--or his copying the line from her. The Snape we know comes up with his own sarcastic comebacks.) That's another irony, BTW: Ron, who hates Snape almost as much as Harry does, owes his life to him--doubly, since the HBP's remark jogs Harry's memory of Snape's first lesson on Bezoars. Valky: It's funny that you call it a snarky joke, Yes, I think it's in character for him too. But OTOH Slughorn is distinctly reminded of Lily when Harry produces the Bezoar. It can mean Slughorn sees what he wants to see, or that he really does remember Lily doing something like that, if not the exact same thing. Neither of these alternatives is confirmed truer than the other. But if the second is true, Snape would still write 'Just shove a Bezoar down their throats' across the antidotes in reaction to that had he been depending on Lily's cues during class. It's perfectly possible someone else also wrote the same thing down in their own notes after seeing Harry do it in that class. Something canon that backs this idea is that Harry looks for and expects explanatory notes about Golpalotts law in Snapes margins but cannot find any. It *appears* that the HBP didn't have difficulty understanding the law to Harry, but not to me. The rest of the book is evidence that Harry was holding in his hands the very place Snape would have written notes on this assumed understanding of the law in NEWT potions. He wrote none, not a one. If Snape was taking cues from Lily in class and making a note of them in the text book, but Lily did as Harry in the Golpalotts law class, doing apparently nothing and then producing a Bezoar at the last minute, it would inevitably follow - There would be no notes on Golpalotts law in Snapes book. Surprise, surprise, there are no notes on Golpalott's law. > Carol, thanking Valky for correcting her typo as she really does > know how to spell "concede" Valky who never doubted Carol. :) From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Feb 27 22:59:44 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 22:59:44 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's attitude (was Re: On lying and cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165512 > Carol responds: > You raise some interesting points here. How can we reconcile "what is > right" vs. "what is easy" with the Slytherinish tactics used by > Dumbledore to get Slughorn to Hogwarts (balanced by Slughorn's own > tactics, including Transfiguring himself into a chair and pretending > to have been kidnapped by Death Eaters to avoid going to Hogwarts and > yielding up the true memory)? Pippin: We need to distinguish between being manipulative or coercive and being indirect. To my mind it's only manipulation in the harmful sense if the motive is concealed. It's no secret to Slughorn that Harry and Dumbledore are trying to get that memory, and nothing is made conditional on Slughorn's cooperation, so it's hardly coercive. Compare Riddle, who pretends to Ginny that he only wants to be her friend, or young Draco who pretends that he wants to duel with Harry when his real purpose is to get him in trouble with Filch. That's manipulative. But refilling charms? The existence of refilling charms is hardly a secret, nor are we told that it's bad manners to use one, so you can't really say that Harry made Slughorn lose track of how much he'd drunk. No reasonable wizard should expect to keep track by how empty the bottle was getting any more than they would judge the capacity of a car or a trunk by how big it looked from the outside. Similarly, Dumbledore made no secret to Fudge that as long as Fudge continued to maintain that Voldemort had not returned, he and Fudge had come to a parting of the ways and Dumbledore would be doing as he thought best from then on. He didn't try to bully Fudge into cooperating with him. He also didn't pretend to be on good terms and then attack the aurors without warning--he warned them that he might have to hurt them if they tried to take him in. Dumbledore does have a secret motive when he deals with Mrs. Cole, but it's not *his* secret; to tell her the truth would betray the existence of the wizarding world and in the view of wizards would result in a renewal of a conflict which in the past led to some very unhappy situations for wizards and muggles alike. As Dumbledore says, the truth must be treated with great caution; I'm sure his remark is meant to recall Churchill's "bodyguard of lies." The plain fact is that when it comes to saving lives, many ethical systems consider that the ends *do* justify the means. To adhere so much to rules and principles that it puts innocent lives in danger is a Gryffindor weakness well demonstrated by Percy. Slytherin cunning and willingness to set the rules aside is needed as a counterweight, but it should never be indulged in just to make one's own life easier -- that's where I think canon is going with this, anyway. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 22:53:04 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 22:53:04 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound/Harry and HBP book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165513 > Magpie: > I agree with that too. And I also agree that the main problem is > that all of us are hearing not just what each other is saying, but > what it sounds like we're saying. Alla: Right, cannot speak for anybody else, but it certainly happened to me. But I think as I mentioned to you before that this is just mine " second language caused" tendency to summarise thinngs in something that they were not really intended to be in the first place. I am trying to watch for it and to be extracareful when I read the argument, but it happens anyways. Magpie: Because just as I am not saying > that Harry's main reason for keeping the book is to gain an academic > reputation (since that never even really entered my mind) but it > sounded like I was, perhaps other people are not trying to argue > that Slughorn's compliments to Harry are accurate and deserved or > else not significant at all, which they sometimes approach sounding > to me. Alla: Right, of course - not accurate or deserved. Magpie: To me all the stuff about how Harry's learning stuff from the > book or has bigger things to think about or isn't primarily > interested in besting Hermione and Draco seems like some kind of > distraction, because it's irrelevent, imo. Alla: Oh, but see here I do disagree. How can it be irrelevant for me? Harry keeps Slughorn's opinion of him, for sure. But it is very relevant to me why he does that and here I agree with Valky and Geoff and Mike, etc. It is of utmost importance to me, I would say. I want to stress that it does not, it does not make what Harry does right, but it absolutely makes sense for me that Harry does wrong in something that of secondary importance for him through HBP IMO. Magpie: I don't see how it would > change things even if it was Harry's primary goal--and of course, if > that were his goal and he got there by really working on his > studies, there would be nothing wrong in that at all. It's not a bad > goal by definition! Alla: For me it would change things a lot if Harry's primary concern through HBP was to achieve the reputation of potion genuis. I just don't see it that way. It would change things to me that I would have judged him more strictly, I guess. Magpie: But I agree that it's never much of a desire for > Harry. He doesn't particularly like Slughorn's praising him in this > way because he knows it's not true and frankly, I don't think he's > that confident about always pulling it off. He just would rather > have that than explain Slughorn's mistake to him. Alla: Absolutely, he would rather have that, I agree and that is **wrong**. We just disagree on the degree of wrong, I guess, yes? From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Feb 27 02:30:19 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:30:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the trivial and the profound In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45E397BB.3060802@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165514 eggplant107 wrote: > Yes I think it is. There is a simple straightforward explanation for > all the events that happened on the tower that horrible night, but > only if you are willing to abandon your perceptions of Snape that you > made before book 6 came out. > > It's only if you insist that Snape is good do the events of that night > become more than just mysterious, they become downright bizarre. No > matter how much you love a theory if it doesn't fit the facts you must > abandon it. Bart: There is one major piece of information which I have yet to hear ANY ESE!Snape explanation for: Why did Snape tip off the OOP about the raid on the Ministry, and in a timely enough manner for them to get there on time to foil Tommy R.? Note that Trixie and Cissy didn't appear to know about that one. > I think it will be revealed in the last book that Snape is not totally > evil, but I think Snape lovers should be prepared for the fact that > he's not nearly as good as they think he is. But as I say I could be > wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. Oh, I'm quite certain that he's evil. But I think he is far LESS evil than Tommy "the V" Riddle. Bart From elanor.isolda at googlemail.com Tue Feb 27 23:19:05 2007 From: elanor.isolda at googlemail.com (Elanor Isolda) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:19:05 +0000 Subject: Last call for Book 7 theories! Message-ID: <6493bc80702271519y18940c0dl6605809f3685152d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165515 Just a reminder that the deadline for Sectus proposals is February 28th. If you have a Deathly Hallows theory then Sectus is your *last* chance to present it before the book release, which will happen right in the middle of the conference. Whether your theory's plausible or completely insane (or perhaps a bit of both), we want to hear from you. We're also accepting proposals for papers, panels, roundtables or workshops on any Potter-related subject from the academic to the frivolous. Full details are available at http://www.sectus.org/programme.php, or ask me off-list if you have any questions. Regards Elanor Isolda Conference Chair Sectus 2007 -- http://community.livejournal.com/sectus_2007 Celebrate the 10th anniversary of Harry Potter in London! Register now for Sectus 2007 at http://www.sectus.org [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 01:37:28 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 01:37:28 -0000 Subject: Lying and Cheating & Golpalotts law. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165516 --- "M.Clifford" wrote: > > .... > > > Valky: > ...using the book in class isn't necessarily dependent > on Harry putting no effort into learning from it, as I > mentioned before. It does follow that he would have > missed Golpalotts law by learning from the HBP text > notes instead of other texts, because the HBP text has > no notes on Golpalott. It doesn't follow that not > knowing Golpalotts law means he isn't attempting to > learn and understand what he *is* reading in the HBP > text. > > To some degree, it's plausible that his reputation > isn't entirely faked, using the book, notes included, > as his study text and in class, isn't dependent on him > totally faking the knowledge and ability he arrives at > through it. > > ... > bboyminn: The discussion has gotten far too deep and complex for me, so I will confine my comment to one small aspect; Golpalotts Law, and the application of Golpalotts Law, which for simplicity I will call 'Golpalotts Method'. This Method seems very effective if you are /creating/ a poison, and need to make sure you have an antidote for it. But in a spontanious and dymanic poisioning situation, such as the situation with Ron and the mead, it's worthless. By the time the deciphered the individual poisons and determine the individual antidotes plus the 'added' ingredient and brew up the resultng potion, Ron would have been dead. Now, we have been given two universal (actually, semi- universal) antidotes in the books; Bazoar and Mandrake. Is it better for an Auror or wizard-with-enemies to carry a whole chemistry set and for them to try and work out long complex antidote formulas while they are dying of poison, or is it better to have a small store of /universal/ antidotes? 'Golpalotts Method' was implied in the potions lesson, but it wasn't stated (as far as I remember). True Harry did not apply 'Golpalotts Method', but he did find a fast and practical solution to a very real and likely problem. And as far as I'm concerned, he learned that particular lesson better than any of the other students, because Harry taught himself, aided by the 'Book', to find practical solutions to practical problems; not theoretical solutions to theoretical problems. Let me remind everyone that how any particular student does in class is meaningless. Harry does terrible in Snape's potions class leading up to the OWL test, yet he gets a 'B' (by standard letter grades). That's not too shabby. That shows that Harry is quite capable of brewing potions when Snape is off his back. Further note that regardless of what formula Harry uses, he does very successful brew his potions in Slughorn's potions class. When he successfully brews potions, it's hard to say his reputation isn't deserved. Now, Harry looks corrospondingly better, because the references all the other students are using are so poor. But I just don't see what Harry is doing as "Cheating", because it shows the regardless of what recipe he uses, if left alone, he can /apply/ them and that is the biggest factor. Regardless, how any student does in class is irrelvant. The only thing that matters is how they do on their independantly administered NEWT tests. Harry did poorly in Snape's class and well in the OWL exams. I don't see why Slughorn's class would be any different. Yes, there is a lot of bragging and fawning by Slughorn over Harry's 'gift' for potions, but I suspect, Harry's well applied potions and his knowledge of how to apply universal antidotes over individual antidotes would serve him well on his NEWT tests, and again, that is the only thing that counts. Classroom grades are meaningless beyond being a marker of progress, and from Snape's class we see how that 'marker of progress' can be greatly distorted by a bad teacher. So, it is hard to say Harry cheated on something that is essentially meaningless. It's hard for me to say Harry is cheating because Slughorn feels the urge to butter Harry up and fawn over his successes. In the antidote lesson, that same universal antidote information was available to every student. They had all learned it in lessons with Snape, and they greatly learned about Mandrake universal antidote during the Basalisk attacks. It seems to me that rather than lost the lesson, Harry actually found a better method from what he felt was a more reliable source. Hard to fault him for that. Just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 05:15:44 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 05:15:44 -0000 Subject: Snape's minor memories (Was: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165517 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > How about the time when the Order comes to pick up Harry at the > Dursleys. Now Harry couldn't Apparate yet, but one of the Order > surely could have taken him side-along. Except..., they were trying > to minimize the amount of magic they were using, plus they needed to > bring Harry's trunk which I don't think you can do when you Apparate. > Add to that where they were going (12 GP) required an outside > approach which probably also means the trunk couldn't have been > magicked there, at least not to inside the house. Does this qualify, > Zanooda? :-) Well, yeah, kind of :-). This is a great example, but I wanted to come up with something not from the book. I wanted to think of some hypothetical situation and apply it to Snape, because the discussion was about Snape's flying ability. I tried to imagine where and when a broom would be better than Apparition (in general). I didn't give it much thought since, but I can see one disadvantage of Apparition: you don't know what awaits you on the other end of "the hosepipe", as you say. If you are out of luck, you can unexpectedly reappear right in front of some Muggle, for example. Remember Charlie Weasley's first Apparition test? OK, that happened because he missed his target, but anyway, even if you appear on the right spot, you have no idea what's there. A broom gives you the advantage of seeing what's going on when you approach your destination. > Mike, thinking broom flying sounds a whole lot more fun than > Apparating, and besides, why not enjoy the view? Ya can't do that > while squeezing through a garden hose/hosepipe. I never doubted you would prefer flying, considering your profession and all :-). I myself thought that flying a broom would be horrible, until I found out about the Cushioning Charm. The Cushioning Charm changes everything, of course :-). Without it, broom flying would be regular pain in the ass (literally!). Take care, Mike! zanooda From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 05:39:08 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 05:39:08 -0000 Subject: Lying vs Murder (was:Re: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165518 > > > :: Mike, putting on his horns, affixing his pointed tail and > > :: grabbing his pitchfork in preparation to play Devil's Advocate > > Betsy Hp: > Not out (or is it down?) for the count yet... Mike: > > > >>DA aka Mike: > > But doesn't Harry's potion genius rep cause Slughorn to make the > > connection between Harry and Lily? Doesn't this later allow Harry > > to play off the supposed connection when he's trying to worm that > > memory out of Slughorn? > > Betsy Hp: > No. As Carol pointed out, Slughorn was won over by Harry's > gorgeous green eyes (just like his mom's!). Slughorn was well > under Harry's spell by the time Potions class started. Harry's > false knowledge gained him nothing there. Mike: Playing the Advocate can cloud your meaning. What I meant was that this supposed connection re potions causes *Harry* to realize how much Slughorn loved Lily. I.E. it allowed Harry to figure out to use his mom as the leverage point with Slughorn. He has long since figured out that sluggy wants to "collect" him, hell DD told him as much walking away from Sluggy's house. Going back to when they first met now. Doesn't *everybody* tell Harry he has his mom's eyes? So that doesn't make Sluggy stand out. And after Harry and DD leave Sluggy's, Harry srill isn't convinced that Sluggy isn't prejudiced against Muggleborns like Lily. It's only after many months of Sluggy bringing up Lily when referencing Harry's potion genius, that Harry realizes *that's* the card to play After the Burial. This is where Harry's potions rep is used to advance his cause. And had he not got the potions rep, Sluggy wouldn't have been constantly comparing him to his mom. It's not a matter of Sluggy being won over, it's a matter of Harry learning of Sluggy's soft spot for Lily. That eye comparison is old news for Harry, that won't do it. > > Betsy Hp: > The easy answer is, take it up with Dumbledore. Mike: You could have stopped here with Dumbledore's "Master Plan". I don't really buy that stuff the DA was spewing re Snape. > > Betsy Hp: > I see you your "ha" and raise you an "*ah*ha". We're still looking > at a situation where DDM!Snape's actions gain something for the > good guys, while Harry's actions gain them nothing. Mike: Not quite, I still say Harry gained something for the cause by extracting the memory from Slughorn. And I'm not sure Harry would have made the whole Lily connection without his potions rep, Felix notwithstanding. (which is moot, since without the book Harry doesn't win it and we aren't having this discussion> > > > > Betsy Hp: > > > (2) Who, if anyone, benefits? > > > > > > The note about the Bezoar saves Ron's life, but that was > > > not dependent on Harry lying about his potion knowledge. > > > DA aka Mike: > > No, but using the book for the Bezoar trick (which as everyone > > has said, Harry did to perpetuate his "potions genius" rep) > > caused Slughorn to have that Bezoar in his personal potions kit. > > > > Betsy Hp: > I'll concede that. But it wasn't something Harry planned for. Mike: Tweeeet, Foul, number 42, Miss Betsy. The questin was "Who benefits?", not whether it was planned. That's later in the program. I get two free throws. And my point still stands. Ron benefits, far more than Harry does by getting a rep he doesn't care that much for. > Betsy Hp: > Part of the DDM!Snape assumption. There's canon that supports non- > killer Snape, though being Snape, it's by no means definitive. Mike: Not arguing against it, but are you saying the overall feeling of Snape's story, or do you have something more specific in mind? > Betsy Hp: > I'll give you the bezoar saving Ron's life. So Ron benefits from > Harry's lie. However, I don't think you fully support your "pshaw" > of the consequences of DDM!Snape's actions. So the contention that > DDM!Snape's actions benefit the Order still stands. Mike: Yup, We each get a point here, though I could be gracious and say that you got two points.... naah! :P > Betsy Hp: > Incredibly, outrageously, and ridiculously fair. Harry trips > and falls into his false reputation of being a potions genius. He > hasn't thought about and weighed the costs and benefits, he merely > assumes that being known as smart is kind of nice. Mike: I actually, slightly disagree that Harry thinks it's nice. AFAIK, none of the other kids are giving Harry accolades for his potions genius, only Slughorn. And I never got the feeling that Harry was all that comfortable with Slughorn's fawning. > Betsy Hp continues: > So not only is Harry morally compromising himself, he's doing so > for no apparent reason. And it's fair to judge Harry for both the > lie and the sloppy thinking that lead to the lie. Mike: I do acknowledge and agree with you, Carol, Magpie, et al that in the narrower scheme of things, Harry is being dishonest accepting accolades for his unearned rep as Potion King. I do not agree with whomever may still be left that thinks Harry was Cheating , and not really convinced on the small "c" cheating. But, let's talk about that rep. Which characters are crediting Harry with being a potions genius? Certainly not Ron and Hermione. Both of them know about the Prince and give him all the credit. Hell, Ron even says "He was a genius, the Prince." And Hermione told Harry that he "got a reputation for Potions brilliance you don't deserve." We aren't really shown any of the other classmate's reactions to Harry other than Draco's sneering after the Felix win, which doesn't count on many levels, imo. So who's left? Slughorn, and any others within his earshot that care and that don't discount his fawning tendencies (which probably excludes the entire staff). And haven't you and Carol just told me that Slughorn was predisposed to this mode? Didn't Harry 'just have to exist' to have Slughorn trying to get Harry into his camp? Therefore, wouldn't it be pointless for Harry to try to talk Slughorn down, get him to stop that fawning? IOW, I'm not convinced that anyone besides Sluggy has annointed Harry with oil or peeling grapes for him. Harry neither seeks nor really wants this potions rep with Slughorn, therefore I don't see it as something that Harry should be held accountable for. Slughorn would have just focused on something else, there was always going to be something with Slughorn. Who knows what Slughorn would have picked, or whether Harry would have deserved that something either. More and more I'm convinced that the proper perspective is the Grand Scheme of things that Valky is espousing, and that Steve and Geoff (and myself) have added onto. Harry's focus with Dumbledore and his lesson's is so far beyond his desire for his potion's rep that it doesn't register as a concern. So in this respect, I'm agreeing with Alla, Harry doesn't want to expend the effort on correcting Slughorn with so little chance that it would make any difference. This whole potions rep doesn't register on Harry's radar, right up until the point where he decides to exploit it to get the memory. That makes the only time Harry uses it is for an advancing the cause purpose. > Betsy Hp: > The only fly you manged to flick into my iced tea is that Ron does > benefit from Harry's lie. But because Harry doesn't lie *in order > to* save Ron's life, it's an unintended consequence that gives > little commendation to Harry. Mike: Ahh, but I did get that fly in there which is the purpose of the DA Made you throw out that glass and get a new one. Oh and I agree, totally unintended. > Betsy Hp (pointing out to Mike that he hit a *girl*, a girl > wearing *glasses*, no less. ) Mike, pleading that I was Imperiused From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Feb 28 05:30:05 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 00:30:05 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lying and Cheating & Potions!Genius.... References: Message-ID: <006d01c75af9$818e9470$ce66400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 165519 > Magpie: > I don't think it is "drawing the line." I think it's describing what > Harry is doing. If you mean that Harry hides the book after > Sectumsempra in order to protect his reputation, I never said that > he did. > > > Valky: > Actually I meant hiding the book as in changing the covers so that > Slughorn wouldn't know he was keeping the old book, and then later not > correcting Slughorn when he raves about Harry's performance by > saying... "Well you see sir, The text book that you gave me is full of > interesting secrets, notes and tricks of the trade and I swapped the > covers so you wouldn't know I still had it." Magpie: Harry changes the covers to keep the book he prefers because it's got better stuff in it. He doesn't correct Slughorn's raving about his performance because it's easier not to do so. In either case, of course, he could have been honest or tried to be, and in both cases he chooses not to be, but I think for slightly different reasons. He doesn't *have to* lie or else lose his book--later on when he's far more afraid of losing the book he stops using it in class. Earlier, Harry wants to have it both ways. Have a better time in class *and* not have anyone find out he's got a valuable book. Valky: > > Why he hides these secrets is because he'd lose the only book that > he's ever been interested in learning from. The only thing he feels he > is really able to learn anything from beside Dumbledore, and maybe > Hermione (who he notes is so busy studying for her own NEWTs that > she's not even able to be the fount that she used to be), in this > year. He can't understand McGonagall any more, Snape is teaching the > subject Harry usually loves the most so that's basically ruined for > him, Slughorn's Potions methods are ultimately the inferior ones, > profoundly demonstrated by the notes in the Snape's old text; It *is* > in Harry's mind that this book is his opportunity to get better at > magic in a situation otherwise not conducive to that purpose at all. Magpie: Harry does not have to do extra well in class and then pretend he's just kind of brilliant that way in order to keep the book. At the point in the story when Harry is truly worried about the book being taken away because he's been found out, he stops using it in class and is fine with that. > Magpie: > I think he hides the book so that Snape won't take it away. > Once he hides the book he no longer uses it in class. Having the > book was never dependent on faking his reputation in Potions or > covering it up. > > > Valky: > No, that's true, but using the book in class isn't necessarily > dependent on Harry putting no effort into learning from it, as I > mentioned before. It does follow that he would have missed Golpalotts > law by learning from the HBP text notes instead of other texts, > because the HBP text has no notes on Golpalott. It doesn't follow that > not knowing Golpalotts law means he isn't attempting to learn and > understand what he *is* reading in the HBP text. Magpie: I don't think I suggested that his not knowing Golpallotts law meant he wasn't trying to learn anything from the HBP--he is learning lots of spells. We are in his head in class and he's just following directions. He's not asking himself why a counter-clockwise stir on the third stir makes a difference. He's learning a better recipe if he retains it by heart. But that still doesn't remove the same little bit of dishonesty that's always been there, because the HBP's just so constantly has great results and it's so much easier to go along with Slughorn's thinking it's due to Harry's natural genius at Potions than the alternatives. Valky: > To some degree, it's plausible that his reputation isn't entirely > faked, using the book, notes included, as his study text and in class, > isn't dependent on him totally faking the knowledge and ability he > arrives at through it. Magpie: I think if Harry was telling himself that he'd be lying to himself. He's got a better book than everyone else and when he follows the directions just as everyone else follows theirs he gets better results. The suggestion that he gets these results because he's better at the subject than the other students, or he's inherited it from his mother, or that he has any idea why his own methods work better than theirs do beyond "because the Prince knows this stuff" is untrue as far as I can see. If Harry started to convince himself that it wasn't really a fake because maybe he really does just follow directions like "stir three times counterclockwise" better than other people, I'd be more worried about his character than I am now. I'd think: time for a reality check, Harry. > Magpie: > When push came to shove he chose protecting the > book over doing better than everyone else in class. Harry's never > forced to accept specific praise he himself knows is undeserved. > I have acknowledged that Harry has an intent to learn from the book. > > Valky: > Well yes, he can re-replace the text book and have a second one to use > in class or ignore the notes.. which just seems to defeat the purpose > of having them. He chooses to practice the hints and study the tips > and techniques in Snape's notes. And who knows anyone of those hints > or tips could be just the thing to know when he is up against > Voldemort. I don't think it's quite right or fair to expect from Harry > actions which bear out that he has the luxury of time and an unimpeded > focus in which to progress his knowledge like an average student, that > is someone elses life, not his. Magpie: If it's so valuable against Voldemort why isn't he experimenting outside of class instead of things he'd rather be doing? Instead he chooses to try out these amazing ideas only when it's assigned to him in class and he wants to do well on the assignment (and when he can't do the assignment at all he's not worried about it--he's satisfied that his joke answer goes over well), and not make any Potions that we see on his own. I completely understand why Harry would prefer to do this rather than use a regular textbook in class to protect the book and study on his own, but it also points to his priorities--and I'm not seeing the same priorities you are. If he's supposed to be driving himself this way I need to see it and it's not there. In fact, there is a character driving himself the way you're describing and he makes a rather stark contrast to Harry when I read it. Valky: > The way I see it is that Harry is rushing things, trying to squeeze > everything he can out of a short moment between now and his ultimate > showdown with Voldemort, testing the HBP's Potions notes under the > supervision of a competent teacher is actually one of his wiser > decisions in doing that. Magpie: He doesn't seem to be rushing things at all, to me. He seems to spend the year at a fairly relaxed place, studying the Prince's book because it interests him (mostly for the spells and the Prince as a made-up person) not because he's desperately trying to gain skills for Voldemort. It's a handy excuse to make when Hermione's on his back, but everything you mention here (that he wants to test out all this under the supervision of a teacher and learn as much stuff as he can before he meets Voldemort) doesn't sound like HBP!Harry at all. Valky: Although he's not forced to accept the > reputation, allowing it to be makes for expedient progress, and that's > what matters to him doesn't it. Magpie: I think it makes for less hassle than telling the truth, actually, more than expedient progress. If he needs to know this so much and is trying to squeeze out every second he can to try out these Potions under Slughorn's watchful eye, why doesn't he tell Slughorn the truth or get him to help him outside of class as well with some adjusted story? It's not like Slugrhon's not dying to do it or seems like he'd take the book away from Harry. It's Snape he more fears will take it away. Harry's way seems to get him less practice in Potions and less benefit from Slughorn in favor of less hassle all around in class and a book he's interested in to study outside of class. Valky: It's pretty obvious he does not regard > a reputation for brilliance even nearly as highly as the people around > him do. Take Dumbledore's Army for an example; when his list of > triumphs was stated to him he blushed furiously and took pains to > point out to the group that a reputation didn't represent a better > wizard, when it came to the crunch he had scraped by on his gut > instinct and some luck. Not really aware that had given him such a > reputation for Dark Arts defense, he was simply shocked to learn that > people had assumed as much from his accomplishments. Magpie: Not sure how this relates. Harry certainly knows the kind of reputation he's giving himself with Slughorn and rather than explain the truth it's easier to just suffer the embarassment. A different kind of embarassment, of course, because this time the guy's wrong in a different way than Harry thinks other people have been wrong. > Valky: > But there definitely is some of the latter alternative in the dynamic > nonetheless because Harry has offered to share the text notes with > Hermione, she might actually have gotten even more out of them than > Harry could, but she refused on the grounds of her suspicions about > the book's nature. Magpie: Yup. Her loss. > Magpie: > Harry still knows that he's lying by ommission whenever Slughorn > says exactly what Harry is doing and what Harry is demonstrating. > And that's not some huge crime that's worse than murder. But I don't > understand why it's being denied as if it's insulting to Harry crazy > talk either. That's what I don't get. > > > Valky: > Some of it *is* insulting to Harry, crazy talk. :P As I mentioned above. > > It gets ridiculous when real life scenarios of plagarism and cheating > in a context of a fairly normal and not soon-to-be-over life are > given. Or even in the context of comparing Snape's actions and > motivations when he wrote the notes (which we don't even know) to > Harry's actions and motivations in using them. Their lives could not > have been more different. Snape was most likely plotting and planning > a long life hopefully culminating in an Order of Merlin and other > Warlock Council honours. Harry is trying to get good and get it fast > in case tomorrow is the day Voldemort comes for him. Two different > lives, two different contexts. Magpie: How does it make it an insult to Harry to not think the reputation that Slughorn assigns him in sixth year, that of a natural Potions whiz who does better in class using the exact same recipe as everyone else because he's just got some personal excellence in Potions inherited from his mother and so changes recipes based on his own insticts--is untrue? I'm also not sure what Snape's life has to do with it--it's not like we can just assume that if Harry didn't have Voldemort to worry about he'd be the one experimenting in the Potions lab (evidence suggests he'd probably be out on the Quidditch Pitch more often). To me, to be honest, I find it far worse to claim Harry is what Slughorn claims and deserves that praise than to say he doesn't. It makes me think of the Dursleys turning everything Dudders does into something good. Steve: 'Golpalotts Method' was implied in the potions lesson, but it wasn't stated (as far as I remember). True Harry did not apply 'Golpalotts Method', but he did find a fast and practical solution to a very real and likely problem. And as far as I'm concerned, he learned that particular lesson better than any of the other students, because Harry taught himself, aided by the 'Book', to find practical solutions to practical problems; not theoretical solutions to theoretical problems. Magpie: I think anyone who's been a student knows that usually the implied point of the lesson is indeed the lesson. Kids have been trying to get away with "but what does it matter how I got the answer when I got it right!" for years. The point being that you're supposed to be learning what you're being taught in class today, not do it the way you learned in sixth grade. Which is, remember, what Harry is doing. Bezoars aren't a new thing. The practical solution that Harry learned that day was the one the rest of the class learned years before. They tried to move on to learning a more complicated law. I think we can be pretty sure Snape would have taken points for any student answering with "cheek" instead of an antidote brewed according to what he was teaching. Steve: Regardless, how any student does in class is irrelvant. The only thing that matters is how they do on their independantly administered NEWT tests. Harry did poorly in Snape's class and well in the OWL exams. I don't see why Slughorn's class would be any different. Yes, there is a lot of bragging and fawning by Slughorn over Harry's 'gift' for potions, but I suspect, Harry's well applied potions and his knowledge of how to apply universal antidotes over individual antidotes would serve him well on his NEWT tests, and again, that is the only thing that counts. Magpie: That's definitely true. But if that's all that matters can't Harry just be the kid who couldn't even begin to understand Galpallot's Law instead of the kid who won the gold star because he found the practical solution to the problem? Steve: So, it is hard to say Harry cheated on something that is essentially meaningless. Magpie: I'm sure all the teachers on the list appreciate your putting them in their place there.:-) -m From jlenox2004 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 06:13:23 2007 From: jlenox2004 at yahoo.com (jdl3811220) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 06:13:23 -0000 Subject: What about James' sacrifice? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165520 Jenni from Alabama: James gave his life trying to protect not just Harry but Lily's life as well, yet his sacrifice is not shown in the books as 'significant' by JKR, only Lily's. My husband, who is the one that got me hooked on Harry Potter to begin with, has always been a little bit offended by this. A mother's love is powerful stuff, but what about the love of a father and husband? I know in my case, my husband's world revolves around us. Our boy is his heart and soul. I admit I'm a little offended that James' sacrifice is downplayed too. I've kept hoping that JKR would play up James' sacrifice more but so far I've been disappointed. It's been all about Lily's. Does anyone know why this is so? (Besides the fact that JKR is a woman and a mother.) Is there something I'm missing in canon or an interview with JK where she explains this? Jenni from Alabama From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 06:18:49 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 06:18:49 -0000 Subject: Lying vs Murder (was:Re: On lying and cheating/ Killing DD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165521 > > Betsy Hp: > > Part of the DDM!Snape assumption. There's canon that supports non- > > killer Snape, though being Snape, it's by no means definitive. > > Mike: > Not arguing against it, but are you saying the overall feeling of > Snape's story, or do you have something more specific in mind? zgirnius: I used to assume Snape must have killed, at some point, as Death Eater prior to HBP. Since then, I have started to wonder. Some of my reasons: 1) In Spinner's End, Bella accuses Snape of always slithering out of action. This is in the context of Cissy asking Snape to kill someone for Draco, if Draco is unable. 2) The description of Snape's (presumably emotional) pain in "The Flight of the Prince" is suggestive to me. Of course, this could reflect that he thought such things were behind him, or his attachment to Dumbledore, but to me it seems as plausible that this might be because he has not actually killed a human being before. 3) In PoA he makes assorted threats to Sirius, but seems actually to prefer to leave the actual dirty work to the Ministry. "Give me a reason!" (Is kidnapping three students, being an escaped fugitive and mass murderer, and lunging at Snape really not reason enough?) Also, the way he harps on Sirius trying to kill him. It seems like a weak argument to make to Dumbledore if the latter knows him to have murdered people himself. 4) I came across the following interview question and answer. >World Book Festival,2004: > 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 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!" zgirnius: What I notice here is that her comment "He will have seen things that " seems to me to be a case where she started to realize she has said more than she wants to- she does not finish the sentence, and moves on to a new one. The verb she chose, 'will have *seen*', not 'will have *done*' is a really careful choice for what seems to be a slip, if Snape has indeed done things that would cause him to see Thestrals. On the other hand, if it was a slip, she might have used seen because she knows that he had not at that point *done* anything. From catlady at wicca.net Wed Feb 28 06:34:03 2007 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 06:34:03 -0000 Subject: Resemblances/childbirth/GinevraMolly/Sectumsempra/Portraits/Draco/ThatBook Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165522 Magpie wrote in : << But Lily Potter's child doesn't look like Tom. He looks like James and Lily herself. >> Harry looks like James and Harry looks like young TMR and young TMR resembles his Muggle father. (And I've always thought that James resembled Sirius and Severus and Bellatrix, altho' not as much as they resemble each other. It is canon that all the purebloods are related, so it makes sense for any purebloods to look similar.) I suppose it's a bit late for a big reveal that TMR's Muggle father was actually a halfblood, with a pureblood Witch mother who had been disowned from the Black family for marrying a Muggle, thus explaining why her Muggle son resembled so many wizards. Jocelyn wrote in : << Anyway, the point I am making is that even if wizards in the 1920s had better techniques in assisting childbirth, she didn't have access to them and it is a process which is inherently dangerous. >> Years ago, some listie suggested that childbirth is MORE dangerous for wizarding folk. Because we have been told that wizarding children do spontaneous magic when frightened or angry, and elsewhere we have been told that babies are frightened and angry when being squeezed through the birth canal. So the baby being born could, all unaware, set the room on fire or split his mother open or something, and there would be a need for skilled wizarding birth attendants either to immediately reverse horrible accidental magic or to do special spells to prevent it. A Muggle woman giving birth to a wizarding child (like Dean Thomas's mother) would be in the worst situation. Betsey Hp wrote in : << (Ginny has put herself firmly into her mother's camp in HBP, so I'll assume she tends more towards curvy than lean.) >> IIRc there are a couple of times in HBP where Harry (or the narrator) notices that Ginny's face (or facial expression) resembles the Twins, which I absolutely took as meaning that both her face and her figure are the short, wide Weasley (Prewett) type rather than the tall, narrow Weasley type. So I sighed in disappointment that, stacked as she doubtless is at age 15 and 16 and 17, she'll get almost as fat as me when they're married. (Molly Prewett must have been a juicy little bit of all right when she was dating Arthur at school, and I like to pretend that the Weasley kids' abilities at Quidditch were inherited from Gryffindor's superb Seeker, Molly Prewett.) But it seems to me that the two oldest boys are not slaves of their family resemblances. On one hand, Bill was Head Boy (good marks) and Charlie was Quidditch Captain (athletic) and JKR said they were 2 years apart, so it's not that they had to divide the spoils between them, but JKR makes Harry explicitly notice that Bill is not a pompous Percy, but 'cool'. He dresses (or bodybuilds or uses cosmetic spells or something) so that he is a tall, handsome man rather than a gangling beanpole with too-big feet, and his behavior appears to be relaxed and self-confident. As for Charlie, while dragon-wrangling is a very physical job, leaving him with constant ignored burns, I don't recall any evidence of him being insensitive to other people's feelings or uninterested in intellectualizing for intellectualizing's sake. This gives me hope that the other kids will grow up well when they grow up. Va32h wrote in : << You know what has always bothered me about Sectumsempra? Why doesn't Harry know what it does? Or at least have a guess. Most of the spells they learn are derived from Latin words...I am twenty years out of my high school Latin class, and I remembered enough to know that Sectumsempra had something to do with "cutting" and "always". I could make an educated guess about the effects of the spell. >> I never took a Latin class, but I know English words like 'sect' and 'dissect' and 'Semper Fidelus', but I thought Sectumsempra was a spell 'for enemies' -- that is, to turn a pair of friends into enemies by cutting their friendship. Steve bboyminn wrote in : << Nearly Headless Nick doesn't have to act because he really is HIM. (snip) That is quite different that a man-made portrait. >> Because of Dumbledore's portrait in HBP, it occurred to me that the wizarding portraits might not be man-made at all. There may be spells on the great institutions (Hogwarts, St. Mungo's, Ministry of Magic) and old family homes of the [British] wizarding world that respond to the death of a wizard deeply involved with that institution or family by instantly generating an animatedly portrait of him/her. While some of the non-Headmaster portraits at Hogwarts might be beloved teachers and matrons and groundskeepers, I suspect most of them were donated by institutions and families that didn't want them around. To me, this raises questions about the group of drunken monks. Did they all die together to be in the same picture? Were they all members of one family, whose portrait appeared at their family home? If not, if they were associated with one institution, if it was a monastery, it would make sense that a monastery wouldn't want these drunken carousers (who no longer can be punished) around, but that implies it was a wizarding monastery... Carol wrote in : << turn against Voldemort, not because Draco rejects the pureblood supremacy ethic but because, as Dumbledore said, he's not a killer. >> If Draco's attitude toward murder were like mine toward housework (I won't do it, instead I'll pay someone else to do it), but he has to get away from LV because LV will kill him for not murdering, does that count as turning against LV? I think the goal is for him to believe that murder is wrong: people should not be murdered. In that case, he should want to oppose LV, not merely avoid LV. Someone pointed out in OoP, Dumbledore as leader of the Order was directing his people to do what was hardest and most painful for them, with specific examples of Remus hanging with the werewolves, Sirius hiding in that horrible house, and Severus forced to teach little first-year dunderheads. Some people's work against Voldemort (work Sirius would have preferred and been good at) is to fight Voldemort's soldiers, arresting them, killing them if necessary. Suppose Draco, not a killer and disapproving killing, finds himself in the situation that killing a Death Eater in combat is the only way to save himself and innocent bystanders? Steve bboyminn wrote in : << This is why Hermione infuriates me so. She knew there were better formulas, yet doggedly sticks with formulas she knows are bad. >> I still think young Snape enchanted his book so it would repel all eyes except his and Lily's. So it repels Hermione emotionally and repels Ron by being unreadable for him, but Harry has Lily's eyes so he can read it just fine. Young Snape may not have been aware that the Charm he cast had a specific allowance for Lily, but only that he intended 'no one can read my book unless I want them to'. Further, I suspect young Snape's book was enchanted to make a good impression on Lily's eyes. (No matter that I hate LOLLIPOPS, it sure looks like that's where JKR is going.) So the reason that Harry loves and trusts the Prince as his friend is not because the written notes show that the Prince has a snarky wit and the same kind of anger that Harry has, but because the book cast something like a Love Spell on him. The Half Blood Prince's book was originally going to be in the same story as Tom Riddle's diary; the diary cast seduction spells on those who read it; the idea of enchanted books being enchanting would ooze over both enchanted books in the same story. << Even the best students, Hermione and Draco, are just there to pass the test and move on. They want good grades, but they don't have the passion to pursue the subject beyond the classroom. >> And Draco was a bit distracted that year. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 06:45:32 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 06:45:32 -0000 Subject: What about James' sacrifice? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165523 > Jenni from Alabama: > A mother's love is powerful stuff, but what about the love of a > father and husband? I know in my case, my husband's world revolves > around us. Our boy is his heart and soul. I admit I'm a little > offended that James' sacrifice is downplayed too. I've kept hoping > that JKR would play up James' sacrifice more but so far I've been > disappointed. It's been all about Lily's. > > Does anyone know why this is so? (Besides the fact that JKR is a > woman and a mother.) Is there something I'm missing in canon or an > interview with JK where she explains this? zgirnius: Yes, it is not about the distinction between a mother and a father/husband's love. It is about the element of choice. Voldemort told Lily to step aside, he gave her the choice to live, whereas James he just killed. She explained this in an interview given right after the release of HBP to Mugglenet and the Leaky Cauldron, though it seems there may be a bit more info coming in Book 7. (http://www.accio- quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-1.htm) > JKR Interview: > JKR: > 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 - From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Wed Feb 28 07:06:09 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 07:06:09 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound. In-Reply-To: <45E397BB.3060802@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165524 Bart Lidofsky wrote: > There is one major piece of information > which I have yet to hear ANY > ESE!Snape explanation for: > Why did Snape tip off the OOP about > the raid on the Ministry Voldemort's plan was to trick Harry to go to the ministry, but when Snape showed up Harry was already caught by Umbrage so Snape figured the plan had failed, it never occurred to him that Harry would manage to escape and make it all the way to the ministry. With the plan canceled anyway it couldn't hurt to tell the Order of the Phoenix what Harry said, in fact he had to if he wanted to remain a spy for Voldemort. Ron, Hermione, Neville, Luna and about a dozen other people heard Harry talk to Snape about Padfoot, and sooner or later the Order would hear about it and wonder why Snape didn't tell them immediately. Eggplant From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 09:07:52 2007 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 09:07:52 -0000 Subject: Lying and Cheating & Potions!Genius.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165526 > > Magpie: > Bezoars aren't a new thing. The practical > solution that Harry learned that day was the one the rest of the class > learned years before. > > Valky: > Clearly not well enough. ;) Finwitch: My take on this account: Bezoar was a clear shortcut that they all *should* have known about -- if they were listening on their first year. Less work (none) and better (antidote to most poisons) solution. Plus, it's way faster than brewing an antidote. There are other ways, where, if someone comes up with a quick solution no one else thought about -- out-of-the-box that is -- a box that everyone else had closed themselves in. Sure, anyone who was in that box, would feel that out-of-the-box manner was "cheating" even if it wasn't. As for whether it's the method or solution -- well, I'd say it's up to the teacher. And I consider it the teacher's duty to inform students if method counts for more than the solution. Slughorn didn't do so and (sort of) approved of Harry's solution. Well, if Harry had really come up with it himself, anyway... but the notes of the Prince... I guess that's what Harry would have gained from Snape, if not for Snape's unfair hatred of him. Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 09:32:46 2007 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 09:32:46 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's attitude (was Re: On lying and cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165527 > > Pippin: > The plain fact is that when it comes to saving lives, many ethical > systems consider that the ends *do* justify the means. > > To adhere so much to rules and principles that it puts innocent > lives in danger is a Gryffindor weakness well demonstrated by > Percy. Slytherin cunning and willingness to set the rules aside is > needed as a counterweight, but it should never be indulged in > just to make one's own life easier -- that's where I think canon > is going with this, anyway. Finwitch: Yes - which is probably why Percy was in Gryffindor. And I think Dumbledore was good in saying "Right vs. Easy" rather than "Right vs. Wrong". You see, disobeying rules in order to save a life - a world - is Right. Still, you can hardly say obeying rules is 'wrong', now can you? Easy. Dumbledore must have known the Ministry would try something like they really did do. About Percy further-- the one *choice* I see him making, is when he had that big arguement with his father. He chose between Work and Family, and chose Work. It's a choice many do -- anytime the boss wants you to stay for overwork in lesser, everyday terms -- now, which do you think was the Right and which the Easy? No wonder the Twins were upset with him about it -- they, running a business themselves, do have experience of the excessive workload, yet I'm sure they put family first. As do all the other Weasleys... Finwitch From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Feb 28 10:22:35 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:22:35 -0000 Subject: Lying and Cheating & Potions!Genius.... In-Reply-To: <006d01c75af9$818e9470$ce66400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165528 Magpie: I think anyone who's been a student knows that usually the implied point of the lesson is indeed the lesson. Kids have been trying to get away with "but what does it matter how I got the answer when I got it right!" for years. The point being that you're supposed to be learning what you're being taught in class today, not do it the way you learned in sixth grade. Which is, remember, what Harry is doing. Valky: This is exactly what I am addressing in my position. These are Potions lessons, ordinary everyday potions lessons...... --Ch 4 HBP-- 'But while I was at the Dursley's' interrupted Harry, his voice growing stronger, 'I realised a can't shut myself away - or crack up. Sirius wouldn't have wanted that, would he? And anyway, life's too short... look at Madam Bones, look at Emmeline Vance... it could be me next, couldn't it? But if it is,' he said fiercely, now looking straight into Dumbledore's blue eyes, gleaming in the wand light, "I'll make sure I take as many Death Eaters with me a I can, and Voldemort too if I can manage it.' ----------- .... this is what Harry is trying to accomplish, this is what's on his mind. Not cracking up, walking as calmly and unalarmingly in the spotlight as he can, all the while readying himself for the inevitable day, getting ready to go down in the biggest blaze of glory he can make with his meagre but determined abilities. What a student is *supposed* to be doing in a potions lesson,is a thing dependent on the purpose for being there. And my position is that the above written by Magpie and other points ostensibly aiming from the same angle are exclusive to the purpose of professing specialisation in the academic field and to the pursuit of the consequent accolades. And I repeat, that is not even Harry Potters life. What he is "supposed" to be doing to achieve that end, is barely relevant, and utterly irrelevant in the pure context of a final battle to the death. I see the relevance in terms of Harry executing poor judgement and making mistakes by shrugging off the growing cloud of lies he began to live in that landed him in a place where he as good as accidentally murdered a fellow student, but for Snape's intervention. But I don't see willful cheating, and there is no significantly relevant context for 'cheating' anyway. Magpie: Bezoars aren't a new thing. The practical solution that Harry learned that day was the one the rest of the class learned years before. Valky: Clearly not well enough. ;) Magpie: How does it make it an insult to Harry to not think the reputation that Slughorn assigns him in sixth year, that of a natural Potions whiz who does better in class using the exact same recipe as everyone else because he's just got some personal excellence in Potions inherited from his mother and so changes recipes based on his own insticts--is untrue? Valky: It doesn't. Calling it choosing easy over right because Harry taking a stand for the cause of academic honesty in his sixth year by coming forward to tell the world he has access to some geniuses secretly made notes, because that is the pinnacle of ethical conduct in the context of his life, IMO does. Magpie: If it's so valuable against Voldemort why isn't he experimenting outside of class instead of things he'd rather be doing? Instead he chooses to try out these amazing ideas only when it's assigned to him in class and he wants to do well on the assignment Valky: We're told in Chapter 11 that he's using the notes all the time in Potions lessons, for everything. The way I read it is that all Harry consciously notes here is that the text margins are valuable, they are helping to explain a magical subject to him in a language and tone which feels he can understand and has a positive dynamic with. He realises that they have value and are superior to the notes that he is being asked to use, whether that helps him with Voldemort remains to be seen, but that is not a reason to reject the opportunity to use what clearly appears to be superior magical information. He does experiment outside of class that we are aware of, but in canon this is only with the spells. Magpie: He doesn't seem to be rushing things at all, to me. He seems to spend the year at a fairly relaxed place, studying the Prince's book because it interests him (mostly for the spells and the Prince as a made-up person) not because he's desperately trying to gain skills for Voldemort. It's a handy excuse to make when Hermione's on his back, but everything you mention here (that he wants to test out all this under the supervision of a teacher and learn as much stuff as he can before he meets Voldemort) doesn't sound like HBP!Harry at all. Valky: I Beg your pardon, Magpie, I realised my language was loaded after I post so I'll take this opportunity to correct myself. I don't mean to say that Harry thought out the idea to test the Potions under supervision. Again I believe he is simply _taking an opportunity_ that exists thanks to Slughorns Rose Coloured Glasses attitude. It is one of his wiser moves nonetheless, as opposed to testing the Sectumsempra out in a private bathroom wizard duel. Steve: So, it is hard to say Harry cheated on something that is essentially meaningless. Magpie: I'm sure all the teachers on the list appreciate your putting them in their place there.:-) Valky: This reminds me of debate that raged hot** pre-HBP about Snape dropping Harry's potion in OOtP and thereby avoiding giving him the grade that he *did* deserve - as inconsequential vs unfair : **mea culpa on the raging hot :P In a message dated 7/31/03 9:17:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, bibphile at ... writes: > I was under the impression (though I admit that I don't know why) > that only O.W.L.s counted fifth year. Basically if you pass the > test you pass even if you have straight zeros and if you fail the > test you fail even if you have straight 100's. That's what I thought too - at least, that's what I remember being told by people who understand the system. It's not Snape's grading at all at this point...it doesn't even matter what Harry gets on the potions from Snape, all that matters is what the examiners give him on his OWL. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/74576 From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Wed Feb 28 14:26:16 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:26:16 -0000 Subject: Did Voldemort make use of a Horcrux already? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165529 As most other subjects, this has probably been discussed earlier, but I'm wondering if maybe Voldemort already used one of the 6 Horcruxes which he created. What makes me ask is parts of the following speaches from Voldemort in GOF, chap The Death Eaters 1) (p 562): "And then I ask myself, but how could they have believed I would not rise again? They, who knew the steps I took, long ago, to gueard myself against mortal death? They, who had seen proofs of the immensity of my power, in the times when I was mightier than any wizard living?" and later 2) (p 566): "I was ripped from my body, I was less than spirit, less than the meanest ghost... but still, I was alive. What I was, even I do not know... I, who have gone further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality. You know my goal - to conquer death. And now, I was tested, AND IT APPEARED THAT ONE OR MORE OF MY EXPERIMENTS HAD WORKED... (my highlights) for I had not been killed, though the curse should have done it." Ok, to me it appears that at the time Voldemort was hit by the backfiring AK, he may have "died" and lost the soul-piece inside him, which was at that exact moment replaced by one of the Horcruxes. Too far off? Inge From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 14:43:08 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:43:08 -0000 Subject: Snape in flight (Was: Snape's minor memories) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165530 zanooda wrote: > Hermione played Quidditch with Harry, Ron and Ginny in summer, but > she was "dreadful" (HBP,p.105). I agree with you both about Snape > though. I see him as someone who would master every skill considered > useful in WW. He despises "weakness" and would hate to appear weak > and incompetent in any situation. He doesn't have a natural gift, but > he seems to be hard-working and determined enough to become a decent > flyer. > > > zanooda, who intended to end her post with an example of a situation > where someone needs to use a broom instead of Apparition, but > couldn't think of any, probably because of the late hour... > Carol responds: I still think that the broom in the memory behaves as if it's hexed, not as if the boy riding (young Severus) it is having trouble through his own lack of ability. And the referee example shows that he *can* fly. Again, Ron and Harry would have laughed themselves silly if he'd been inadequate in any way, and spitting in the books is a sign of anger, not flying sickness. That aside, we hear of Dumbledore taking a broom rather than Apparating (in part, probably, because of the anti-Apparition spells on Hogwarts and its grounds) in SS/PS, so if Snape needed to leave Hogwarts for some reason, he'd be in the same position. (Take a broom or run all the way to the gates so you can Apparate? I'd choose a broom in those circumstances.) And interestingly, we see him in OoP in a long black traveling cloak. Why would he need a traveling cloak to Apparate? Maybe he parked his broom in the entryway or just outside the door of 12 GP? Just a thought. Carol, thinking that the advantage of having a view from a broom (A Broom with a View) would be outweighed by the chief disadvantage of flying in daylight, being spotted by Muggles From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Feb 28 15:20:03 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 15:20:03 -0000 Subject: What about James' sacrifice? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165531 Jenni from Alabama: > A mother's love is powerful stuff, but what about the love of a > father and husband? I know in my case, my husband's world revolves > around us. Our boy is his heart and soul. I admit I'm a little > offended that James' sacrifice is downplayed too. I've kept hoping > that JKR would play up James' sacrifice more but so far I've been > disappointed. It's been all about Lily's. > zgirnius: > Yes, it is not about the distinction between a mother and a > father/husband's love. It is about the element of choice. Voldemort > told Lily to step aside, he gave her the choice to live, whereas > James he just killed. She explained this in an interview given > right after the release of HBP to Mugglenet and the Leaky Cauldron, > though it seems there may be a bit more info coming in Book 7. JKR: "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" -(TLC/MN) Jen: Look, JKR is posting now! I do think the answer is there's more coming about that as zgirnius said. I've speculated in the past about very specific reasons LV might have given Lily a choice--some knowledge she had from her work perhaps--but at the moment think it might connect more to an overarching theme. Meaning JKR's going somewhere with what heroism is, what's courageous, what's noble. That the traditional way of being a hero, fighting to the end, might not be the only way to be a hero or best way in certain circumstances (although I don't believe she's demeaning James' actions there at all, just taking a different avenue). She's going somewhere with Harry on this, from 'playing the hero' to ultimately defeating Voldemort in a way where he's not battling him and winning by killing him. Well really, none of Harry's heroism has been a fight to the end, but his own intuition and help from others. And if the tower plays out as a loyal Snape, there again JKR had a reason Snape didn't do what many believe he should have done which was fight to the death like James or Sirius would have (although I don't know that she can or will paint Snape as a hero for the tower if an actual AK was involved, that presents its own moral complications). I'm not certain how to tie all these loose threads together exactly, just an idea brewing for why JKR would see Lily's act as a slightly higher caliber of bravery. JKR is working from her own opinions about what is brave after all and not everyone will agree with her. Jen R. From Vexingconfection at aol.com Wed Feb 28 15:16:16 2007 From: Vexingconfection at aol.com (vexingconfection) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 15:16:16 -0000 Subject: Hermione Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165532 I just thought of this and wished to gather others' opinion. Hermione while appearing to hold rules over all else often breaks them more so than Harry or Ron, herself. I would even say she has out done the twins and rivaled their mischeif-just not seeked the same glory in it. She started in the first book when she followed Ron and Harry and even lied to a teacher about how she became locked in a bathroom with a troll (I never understood the need to lie there). She slapped Malfoy, kidnapped and imprisoned Ms Skeeter, yelled at a teacher and walked out of Divination class, made polyjuice potion and many other instances of rule breaking. Were all these instances just situations she thought she could control without being caught or jepordizing safety? Could that be the reason she did not want anything to do with the HBP's book? She showed concern with Harry's new broom by reporting it to her head of house. Yet she also risked her life to go back in time to save him. Another dichotomy would be when she sent birds she had conjured to attack Ron. Does she use her intellect or emotion to govern her actions? I am also thinking of her spell in OoP when anyone who turned the others in would be marked on the forehead. She's sneakier than Harry or Ron, better at spells but how stable is she? Vexie From funkeginger at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 12:58:41 2007 From: funkeginger at yahoo.com (funkeginger) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:58:41 -0000 Subject: Book seven can not be the last book because Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165533 I dont think that the Deathly Hallows can be the last book because there is too much to do. Harry has to find four Horcruxes, then he has to try and kill Voldemort. It's too much to do in one book . JKR only makes most of the books max 780 pages . You can't just do that in that many pages. Also we have to see what happens to Harry and the others after V dies. Most people would not mind seeing what happens in the future to them up to ten years at least. We also have to find out who RAB is and see who DD's new replacement is so all in all it would have to be alot longer then the other books at least 1000 pages . But I don't think it would be as good if she just crams it all in to one book. I still will love it but not as much as the others. I also heard rumors that HP is going to die in this book. I can't imagine her killing Harry at the end. I think she still will do one more book, but just make us think the Deathly Hallows is the last. funkeginger From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Feb 28 16:09:46 2007 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:09:46 -0000 Subject: Percy's fight (was DD's attitude)/On the trivial and the Profound/Lying & Cheati In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165534 > Finwitch: > > Yes - which is probably why Percy was in Gryffindor. And I think > Dumbledore was good in saying "Right vs. Easy" rather than "Right vs. > Wrong". You see, disobeying rules in order to save a life - a world - > is Right. Still, you can hardly say obeying rules is 'wrong', now can > you? Easy. Dumbledore must have known the Ministry would try something > like they really did do. > > About Percy further-- the one *choice* I see him making, is when he had > that big arguement with his father. He chose between Work and Family, > and chose Work. It's a choice many do -- anytime the boss wants you to > stay for overwork in lesser, everyday terms -- now, which do you think > was the Right and which the Easy? > > No wonder the Twins were upset with him about it -- they, running a > business themselves, do have experience of the excessive workload, yet > I'm sure they put family first. As do all the other Weasleys... Magpie: I don't think Percy was choosing work over family. He was angry about his father saying that he only got his promotion because he was a patsy and they wanted him to spy on Arthur (because of course Percy couldn't have earned his promotion) and Percy let out years of resentment he felt about his father's own attitude about his job, since his father had just revealed how little he thought of Percy's worth at the office. I don't think that fight had much to do with work vs. family at all. It mostly family, but he uses work to express it. Magpie: To me all the stuff about how Harry's learning stuff from the > book or has bigger things to think about or isn't primarily > interested in besting Hermione and Draco seems like some kind of > distraction, because it's irrelevent, imo. Alla: Oh, but see here I do disagree. How can it be irrelevant for me? Harry keeps Slughorn's opinion of him, for sure. But it is very relevant to me why he does that and here I agree with Valky and Geoff and Mike, etc. It is of utmost importance to me, I would say. I want to stress that it does not, it does not make what Harry does right, but it absolutely makes sense for me that Harry does wrong in something that of secondary importance for him through HBP IMO. Magpie: It would make a difference to me too, in terms of Harry's character, of course. Every character must be judged and understood on his own terms and the Harry who is trying to put himself ahead in Potions would be a different person than the one in canon now (just as I think the Harry Valky is describing is a totally different person than the one I see in canon). Where it's irrelevent for me is that it doesn't turn something untrue into something true. To compare it to Snape, I think Snape killed DD with an AK. Now, if it does turn out that people are correct in that he didn't kill him for some reason, that changes that Snape didn't kill Dumbledore. If Snape is DDM it doesn't change that he killed Dumbledore. It changes his reasons for doing it, it changes the way we understand and judge him as a character, it changes the context. But the AK doesn't become not an AK because Snape is acting on DD's orders if he was. Valky: What a student is *supposed* to be doing in a potions lesson,is a thing dependent on the purpose for being there. And my position is that the above written by Magpie and other points ostensibly aiming from the same angle are exclusive to the purpose of professing specialisation in the academic field and to the pursuit of the consequent accolades. And I repeat, that is not even Harry Potters life. What he is "supposed" to be doing to achieve that end, is barely relevant, and utterly irrelevant in the pure context of a final battle to the death. Magpie: Yes, but I'm really just still not buying your claims that Harry is approaching Potions class with this different idea of what he's "supposed" to be doing there, and so making his decisions based on these higher ideals. The fact that at certain times he says things about Voldemort simply does not translate into a Harry who is focused on preparing himself for that battle all year and making all his decisions based on what will get him the most skill and knowledge in all things the most quickly. Nor does his attitude towards Potions reflect it that I can see. He's not taking his schoolwork seriously in a different way than other students, he's taking it just as casually as he's done throughout the series. He's interested in the things that interest him, and less interested in the things that don't interest him. It feels like there's a lot of having it both ways as well. Potions is totally unimportant so it doesn't matter if Harry takes the easy way, yet he's also not taking the easy way at all because learning stuff--which is the point of the class--is so important to him. Magpie: Bezoars aren't a new thing. The practical solution that Harry learned that day was the one the rest of the class learned years before. Valky: Clearly not well enough. ;) Magpie: Hmmm... See, if you're serious about that this is just the kind of thing I'm talking about. Harry is awarded points for "cheek" in that class because Slughorn and everyone else knows he's not tried to do the more difficult task. Slughorn winds up, iirc, by reminding Harry that in fact a bezoar will *not* always be the answer. That's also why there's a long moment where he stares at the bezoar and Harry isn't sure if he's going to yell at him. (It's also why Harry tells Ron they couldn't both hand in bezoars--it would look stupid, which it would not if that was the "right" answer.) The fact that the other students try to do the real assignment is not a sign that they don't remember that bezoars are an antidote to poisons (or have not had someone else tell them, as Harry did). It's one thing to laugh at Harry's cheeky trick and be glad he got away with it. It's another, imo, to try to pretend Harry really was showing how clever he is compared to the other students and taking the thing in a more serious way and that he really lives up to how Slughorn describes him afterwards. That's what reminds me of the Dursleys with Dudley. Magpie: How does it make it an insult to Harry to not think the reputation that Slughorn assigns him in sixth year, that of a natural Potions whiz who does better in class using the exact same recipe as everyone else because he's just got some personal excellence in Potions inherited from his mother and so changes recipes based on his own insticts--is untrue? Valky: It doesn't. Calling it choosing easy over right because Harry taking a stand for the cause of academic honesty in his sixth year by coming forward to tell the world he has access to some geniuses secretly made notes, because that is the pinnacle of ethical conduct in the context of his life, IMO does. Magpie: Well, to me it's just calling a spade a spade. Just as I said to Alla, I think you can be clear about what Harry's doing and still take into consideration the circumstances. Sometimes you do the easy thing for a good reason, and if you're doing that I don't see why you wouldn't be upfront about it. Of course, I also am not convinced Harry's lying about this particular thing is so important to the greater good, because his behavior doesn't, to me, follow logically from the priorities you claim he has, imo. Magpie: If it's so valuable against Voldemort why isn't he experimenting outside of class instead of things he'd rather be doing? Instead he chooses to try out these amazing ideas only when it's assigned to him in class and he wants to do well on the assignment Valky: We're told in Chapter 11 that he's using the notes all the time in Potions lessons, for everything.The way I read it is that all Harry consciously notes here is that the text margins are valuable, they are helping to explain a magical subject to him in a language and tone which feels he can understand and has a positive dynamic with. He realises that they have value and are superior to the notes that he is being asked to use, whether that helps him with Voldemort remains to be seen, but that is not a reason to reject the opportunity to use what clearly appears to be superior magical information. Magpie: That doesn't answer what I said. If Harry is so focused on getting the information out of the book, why is he just using the book in class for everything Slughorn assigns in class? I agree with you that he's taking the opportunity to test out these potions in class and I've got no problem with it--I think it's wise of him to follow the Prince's instructions every time instead of the textbook's--but to me that doesn't translate into Harry's squeezing all the Potions knowledge out of the book that he can. He's just smart enough to follow the correct instructions in class. You mentioned that we see him performing experiments with the spells outside of class and I agree. Spells interest him. DADA interests him. The book interests him. I think he gets enjoyment out of it and likes learning the things he likes to learn. I don't see him pushed by feeling he's learning this stuff for Voldemort at all. To me it seems a lot more straightforward: Harry likes a lot of things about the book, he wants to keep it. His use of the book in class draws attention to himself, because of the results, which are a new thing for him. When Slughorn gives him an easy way to explain his progress by calling him a natural, he goes along with it. Magpie: I'm sure all the teachers on the list appreciate your putting them in their place there.:-) Valky: This reminds me of debate that raged hot** pre-HBP about Snape dropping Harry's potion in OOtP and thereby avoiding giving him the grade that he *did* deserve - as inconsequential vs unfair : Magpie: And it was unfair, imo. Luckily Harry's ultimate grades would not be able to faked that way, but that doesn't change that what Snape did was wrong--significantly so. Harry's using the book in class to give himself an advantage won't necessarily get him a better grade on his NEWTS. (Though once again I can't help but feel for the other students who are getting an inferior class. If Harry gets a better grade on his NEWTS because he's studied a better textbook he'll have earned it himself and not have cheated at all. But boy, I'd be ticked off if I were unfairly handicapped the way the other students were.) But I still think that if you're taking a class you have to take the class seriously to some extent. Not to a crazy extent--I agree that obviously Harry getting a good grade on his Potions NEWT is less important than his surviving to take it. But if the class doesn't mean anything what would be the point of taking it? How would you get anything out of it? Harry gets something out of Snape's class because most of the time Snape does take it seriously. If Snape always just dropped Harry's Potions on the floor and he got zeroes and failed because Snape hated him so he was never truly able to know when he was doing something right I can't imagine Harry would think the class was worth anything. I think he does think it's worth something--even in sixth year. It's not the most important thing in his life but as a student whose life pretty much is school even with Voldemort breathing down his neck, it means something. I do agree that Harry's grades in individual class days don't matter the same way they didn't that day in Snape's class. My point isn't that they really do matter more than they do. My point is there is a difference in saying, "Yeah, Harry's being a fake here and a bit dishonest, but the consequences are pretty limited" and saying, "No, Harry's not being dishonest or faking at all because the consequences are limited and also he because Harry's really doing what he's supposed to be doing anyway, although if he's not doing what he should be it's because he's making a sacfifice for Voldemort." -m From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Feb 28 16:10:42 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:10:42 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: Unbreakable Vows Message-ID: <22628636.1172679042701.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165535 Bart: There is not a lot of canon here, so I am basically using logic. I will, however, outline the logic I am using: 1) The Unbreakable Vow is a fairly well-known spell (at least Ron's comments/story and the fact that it was assumed that Snape would be familiar with it implies this). 2) Useless spells would not generally become well-known, except perhaps for their uselessness. 3) Therefore (first conclusion): The Unbreakable Vow is a useful spell. 4) If someone breaks the Unbreakable Vow, it causes death (we only have hearsay for this, but there must be SOME reason why it's called the Unbreakable Vow. We can assume that breaking it is either physically impossible, or has very dire consequences. 5) Assumption: No sane person would make an Unbreakable Vow if they don't clearly understand what it is they are vowing to do. 6) Therefore (second conclusion, combining #3 and #5): The vow is what the person making the vow understands it to be. 7) This would imply that the Unbreakable Vow is only triggered if the person who had made the vow believes that he or she has broken it. Given this (and if you disagree, feel free to show flaws in my logic), what do you think SNAPE was thinking he was vowing to do at Spinner's End? Notes: What happens when an unbreakable vow is unachievable due to changing of circumstances? How unbreakable is it? Can the person to whom the vow was made agree that the vow has been kept, when it hasn't? Examples: A) I make a UV to take someone to dinner at Windows on the World restaurant for a special occasion (meaning a specific date). Unfortunatetly, it was destroyed in the 9/11 attack, making it physically impossible for me to keep the vow, although there was no intent to break it. B) The vow is achieved, but not by me. I vow that I will chop down a given tree. When I get there, it has already been choppped down. 9) The circumstances have been misrepresented to the person who makes the vow. A person makes an unbreakable vow, "If you get sick, I promise to take you to Dr. Bombay to get you better. You get sick. Do I take you to Bernard Fox? Do you die? Bart From sweetlittleangel113 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 15:56:16 2007 From: sweetlittleangel113 at yahoo.com (Theresa McKee) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 07:56:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Deathly Hollows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <701489.89762.qm@web62007.mail.re1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165536 Hello Everyone. I thought I should introduce myself first since I am new. My name is Theresa and like everyone else I enjoy HP. Here is my question. Deathly Hollows = Godric Hollows (I hope I got the name right) the location in which James and Lily was murdered, where it all began. Theresa. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 16:34:27 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:34:27 -0000 Subject: /On the trivial and the Profound/Lying & Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165537 > Alla: > > Oh, but see here I do disagree. How can it be irrelevant for me? > Harry keeps Slughorn's opinion of him, for sure. But it is very > relevant to me why he does that and here I agree with Valky and Geoff > and Mike, etc. > > It is of utmost importance to me, I would say. I want to stress that > it does not, it does not make what Harry does right, but it > absolutely makes sense for me that Harry does wrong in something that > of secondary importance for him through HBP IMO. > > Magpie: > It would make a difference to me too, in terms of Harry's character, > of course. Every character must be judged and understood on his own > terms and the Harry who is trying to put himself ahead in Potions > would be a different person than the one in canon now (just as I > think the Harry Valky is describing is a totally different person > than the one I see in canon). Where it's irrelevent for me is that > it doesn't turn something untrue into something true. > > To compare it to Snape, I think Snape killed DD with an AK. Now, if > it does turn out that people are correct in that he didn't kill him > for some reason, that changes that Snape didn't kill Dumbledore. If > Snape is DDM it doesn't change that he killed Dumbledore. It changes > his reasons for doing it, it changes the way we understand and judge > him as a character, it changes the context. But the AK doesn't > become not an AK because Snape is acting on DD's orders if he was. Alla: Right, it does not turn something true into something untrue, but I am just not getting how describing the different reasons for which Harry may have done that stuff does not change the general picture. not that I am asking you to agree with it, as I mentioned before I never write to convince anybody of anything, I am just confused how you not seeing the argument translates ( or again what I am reading, maybe I am misunderstanding again) into the argument being invalid one. Good analogy with Snape. For sure, yes AK does not change being AK ( if this is real one) regardless of what were reasons for Snape to fire it off. But, but, but isn't the picture of Snape heroically taking orders from DD and killing his mentor **on his orders** translates into something different bigger picture than Snape killing DD to save his own skin, to please his boss Voldemort, or any other reasons that we can come up with for Evil or OFH! Snape? Isn't that Snape a much more sympathetic figure? A Saintly follower of Dumbledore? I am not kidding at all here. Same with Harry - regardless of the reasons, he is cheating and he knows that. But Harry who does not really care much about his academic work and primarily concerns of his survival, grieving for Sirius, etc, he is **still** cheating, yes, but those reasons make me empathise with him, feel that this is the moment of the very secondary importance in Harry's life. Potions class, I mean. That as I told you before, if I were to judge people's honesty and their general worth as friends based on who cheated in school or college, oh boy. I am afraid that **a lot** my friends and some of my family back home would have to be considered horrible people. Just different mentality, you know? Yes, I know that you do not think that Harry is a horrible person based on that incident. The analogy I am drawing is that this was of secondary importance, that's all. > Magpie: > Yes, but I'm really just still not buying your claims that Harry is > approaching Potions class with this different idea of what > he's "supposed" to be doing there, and so making his decisions based > on these higher ideals. The fact that at certain times he says > things about Voldemort simply does not translate into a Harry who is > focused on preparing himself for that battle all year and making all > his decisions based on what will get him the most skill and > knowledge in all things the most quickly. Nor does his attitude > towards Potions reflect it that I can see. He's not taking his > schoolwork seriously in a different way than other students, he's > taking it just as casually as he's done throughout the series. He's > interested in the things that interest him, and less interested in > the things that don't interest him. Alla: Well, I guess then we have to agree to disagree. Plenty of canon was given as to how Harry feels about what is coming including that scene with DD before he comes to Weasleys and when Harry and DD talking that I quoted before. The fact that if Harry does not talk about it **all** the time, does not mean that it is not on his mind all the time IMO. IMO he talked about it enough for me to see that it IS of utmost importance for him - to beat Voldemort, to survive, etc, and yes of much more importance than to care much of Potions class. I understand that it does not translate that way for you, but it certainly does for me and I think it is well supported by canon. Again IMO. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 16:43:51 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:43:51 -0000 Subject: Unbreakable Vows In-Reply-To: <22628636.1172679042701.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165538 > Bart: > There is not a lot of canon here, so I am basically using logic. I will, however, outline the logic I am using: > 5) Assumption: No sane person would make an Unbreakable Vow if they don't clearly understand what it is they are vowing to do. > > 6) Therefore (second conclusion, combining #3 and #5): The vow is what the person making the vow understands it to be. zgirnius: I disagree with 6). A person could make sure they understand what is being asked before taking a Vow. But I still think it would be possible for them not to know. Suppose Snape was pretty sure Voldemort had asked Draco for an ice-cream cone. But he's wrong! Voldemort asked Draco to kill Dumbledore. I think Snape would still be on the hook for the killing, not the ice-cream. It's the Vower's responsibility to make sure they understand what they are agreeing to, just as it is the signer's in a RL contract. That said, I think Snape knew what he was agreeing to. > Bart: > Given this (and if you disagree, feel free to show flaws in my logic), what do you think SNAPE was thinking he was vowing to do at Spinner's End? zgirnius: I think Snape was agreeing that, if Draco's seeming inability to it himself placed him in need of protection from Voldemort's wrath, Snape would kill Dumbledore himself. Bart: > Notes: What happens when an unbreakable vow is unachievable due to changing of circumstances? How unbreakable is it? Can the person to whom the vow was made agree that the vow has been kept, when it hasn't? zgirnius: I think if a UV becomes unachievable, then the Vower still dies. This would explain the use of weasel words in phrasing the one Vow we ahve seen. For example, in the third clause of the one Vow we have seen, Snape only promised to kill Dumbledore if it 'proved necessary'. If DD had a heart attack early in the book and died, it would not have proved necessary for Snape to act. Without the qualifiers, though, it would be a problem. From shamyn at pacbell.net Wed Feb 28 16:27:50 2007 From: shamyn at pacbell.net (Draeconin) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:27:50 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Voldemort make use of a Horcrux already? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45E5AD86.60809@pacbell.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165539 Inge wrote: > As most other subjects, this has probably been discussed earlier, > but I'm wondering if maybe Voldemort already used one of the 6 > Horcruxes which he created. > > > > Ok, to me it appears that at the time Voldemort was hit by the > backfiring AK, he may have "died" and lost the soul-piece inside > him, which was at that exact moment replaced by one of the Horcruxes. > > Too far off? If that was indeed the case, then why couldn't Voldemort be 'killed' one more time? If it indeed takes ten years and great sacrifice to bring him back to full life, why NOT kill him? That would give another ten years of relative peace in which to find and destroy the horcruxes. No, I'm more inclined to believe that, for whatever reason, Voldemort was unable to make use of any of his horcruxes the first time around. The only thing that makes sense to me is that he was indeed trying to create another horcrux by using baby Harry as the 'significant sacrifice' and had that process partially completed when the AK backfired on him. I'm assuming that he'd somehow at least partially detached a portion of his soul, and it was that portion that allowed him to survive. Draeconin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From shamyn at pacbell.net Wed Feb 28 16:40:38 2007 From: shamyn at pacbell.net (Draeconin) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:40:38 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lying and Cheating & Potions!Genius.... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45E5B086.7040505@pacbell.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165540 finwitch wrote: > > There are other ways, where, if someone comes up with a quick solution > no one else thought about -- out-of-the-box that is -- a box that > everyone else had closed themselves in. Sure, anyone who was in that > box, would feel that out-of-the-box manner was "cheating" even if it > wasn't. > > As for whether it's the method or solution -- well, I'd say it's up to > the teacher. And I consider it the teacher's duty to inform students if > method counts for more than the solution. Slughorn didn't do so and > (sort of) approved of Harry's solution. I have a question on this topic: If the HBP's methods were superior to what was being taught, why didn't Snape teach those methods, and keep using them himself while he was the Potions professor? Plot hole? Draeconin From lealess at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 17:23:27 2007 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:23:27 -0000 Subject: Lying and Cheating & Golpalotts law. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165541 > bboyminn: > > The discussion has gotten far too deep and complex for > me, so I will confine my comment to one small aspect; > Golpalotts Law, and the application of Golpalotts Law, > which for simplicity I will call 'Golpalotts Method'. > > This Method seems very effective if you are /creating/ > a poison, and need to make sure you have an antidote > for it. But in a spontanious and dymanic poisioning > situation, such as the situation with Ron and the mead, > it's worthless. By the time the deciphered the > individual poisons and determine the individual antidotes > plus the 'added' ingredient and brew up the resultng > potion, Ron would have been dead. > > > > 'Golpalotts Method' was implied in the potions lesson, > but it wasn't stated (as far as I remember). True Harry > did not apply 'Golpalotts Method', but he did find a > fast and practical solution to a very real and likely > problem. And as far as I'm concerned, he learned that > particular lesson better than any of the other students, > because Harry taught himself, aided by the 'Book', to > find practical solutions to practical problems; not > theoretical solutions to theoretical problems. > > > > Regardless, how any student does in class is irrelvant. > > > > Classroom grades are meaningless beyond being a marker of > progress, and from Snape's class we see how that 'marker > of progress' can be greatly distorted by a bad teacher. > So, it is hard to say Harry cheated on something that is > essentially meaningless. It's hard for me to say Harry is > cheating because Slughorn feels the urge to butter Harry > up and fawn over his successes. > > In the antidote lesson, that same universal antidote > information was available to every student. They had all > learned it in lessons with Snape, and they greatly learned > about Mandrake universal antidote during the Basalisk > attacks. It seems to me that rather than lost the lesson, > Harry actually found a better method from what he felt > was a more reliable source. Hard to fault him for that. > > Just one man's opinion. > > Steve/bboyminn > I teach vocational writing. The point of the class is for a student to actually write, to learn the process by doing it themselves. Part of that involves using techniques I try to teach them, such as outlining papers and constructing paragraphs. Part of it is stepping onto the critical thinking paths I try to show them. I do that by asking students to rephrase in their own words notes they take in class, to analyze many kinds of writing, and to complete research projects. It's a little like potions, without the chemicals. At the end of the class, students should have enough practice and theoretical background to go into the workplace and write independently with purpose and clarity. Suppose I assign an essay on antidotes to known poisons. Most students toil away on the subject, and maybe even learn something through the process, both about writing and about antidotes. But lo, one student sits fidgeting in class, not asking for help from his usual cohorts, then produces a printout of a Wikipedia article on bezoars. I doubt I would be besotted enough with the student to praise him for his cheek. On the contrary. But I am not Slughorn. What has this student gained by giving me the printout on bezoars (besides an F)? Real-life experience? Suppose this student gets into a situation where he has to defend his mentor against the slander of Voldemort and the attacks of the undead. Suppose that student doesn't remember his mentor's instructions on how to rebut the undead. No matter... the mentor might be able to handle that part himself, but there is still Voldemort's poison to worry about. Suppose that student has time to get back to the castle, only to find that not only is there is no bezoar-type Wikipedia article on slander, but the entire Internet is down! Would that student have the ability to apply writing principles to save his mentor? No... call Severus (the good student, the "writing" instructor, the guy who kicked Harrys butt all over the field because the student wouldn't work to learn non-verbal spells or how to stop broadcasting his thoughts). I have heard the "real-life" arguments all my life. The fact is that some classes do prepare students for real life. Not everyone wants to make a career of writing. That doesn't change the fact that in our world, writing is an essential skill for most who want to succeed, if only in communicating their thoughts to others. At Hogwarts, it seems students study potions in their initial classes, with no exceptions. Therefore, making potions must be an essential skill in the magical world. > > Let me remind everyone that how any particular > student does in class is meaningless. Harry does > terrible in Snape's potions class leading up to the OWL > test, yet he gets a 'B' (by standard letter grades). > That's not too shabby. That shows that Harry is quite > capable of brewing potions when Snape is off his back. > Snape is a good teacher, after all. He assigns a lot of essays and, under him, Harry actually has to work in class. Harry learned what he knows of the subject from Snape and from the work he had to do. Contrary to Slughorn's delusion, Harry doesn't seem to have a natural feel for potions. Slughorn is not teaching him. Snape is still teaching him, but without Snape's actual presence, Harry can coast. > Further note that regardless of what formula Harry > uses, he does very successful brew his potions in > Slughorn's potions class. When he successfully brews > potions, it's hard to say his reputation isn't deserved. > Now, Harry looks corrospondingly better, because the > references all the other students are using are so poor. > But I just don't see what Harry is doing as "Cheating", > because it shows the regardless of what recipe he uses, > if left alone, he can /apply/ them and that is the > biggest factor. > When it comes to dealing with real-life situations, not classroom situations, Harry relies on instinct more than learning, on instructions remembered at the last moment. Many have said that Harry is unprepared to face Voldemort, and this is probably true. I expect him to pull rabbits out of his hat for many of the tasks he has to face, the rabbits being his friends and those remembered instructions, like "Expelliarmus." However, if he fails in any task, I bet it will be because he didn't listen to his mentors and apply their teachings. He has the instinct, but not the skills or the discipline, to write. lealess From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 17:37:48 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:37:48 -0000 Subject: Lying and Cheating & Potions!Genius.... In-Reply-To: <006d01c75af9$818e9470$ce66400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165542 Magpie wrote: > If it's so valuable against Voldemort why isn't he experimenting outside of class instead of things he'd rather be doing? Instead he chooses to try out these amazing ideas only when it's assigned to him in class and he wants to do well on the assignment (and when he can't do the assignment at all he's not worried about it--he's satisfied that his joke answer goes over well), and not make any Potions that we see on his own. Carol responds: Exactly. And the answer is *not* that he's preoccupied with fighting Voldemort or worrying about dying, as Valky suggests. If he were, he wouldn't have procrastinated in getting the memory from Slughorn, just as he procrastinated in GoF in preparing for the three tasks. He's not thinking about dying at all: he's thinking about Draco Malfoy, Quidditch, and Ginny. "Harry lay awake for a long time . . . trying to convince himself that his feelings for Ginny were entirely elder-brotherly" (HBP Am. ed. 289); "Harry lay awake for a long time in the darkness. He did not want to lose the upcoming match; not only was it his first as Captain, but he was determined to beat Draco Malfoy at Quidditch even if he could not prove his suspicions about him" (292). Not the thoughts of a boy preoccupied with dying any time soon, or with defeating the Dark Lord whose chosen him as his nemesis. He's no more interested in homework *as homework* than he's ever been, Voldemort or not Voldemort. In Slughorn's class, he just wants to finish his potions without losing his unearned reputation for brilliance, which is why he switches the covers and gives Slughorn the new book disguised as the old one with the rationalization that it cost twelve galleons, so Slughorn is getting the better deal. Look how desperate he is when he doesn't understand Golpalott's Law, and the Prince (who does understand it and may well have arrived at conclusions resembling Steve's--better to have a Bezoar on hand than worry about figuring out an antidote to a blended poison when the victim may die in the meantime--although, of course, a Bezoar doesn't work on all poisons and some have no antidotes) doesn't explain it to him: "He did not have the faintest idea what to do next. . . . "'You sure the Prince doesn't have any tips?' Ron muttered to Harry. "Harry pulled out his trusty copy of Advanced Potion-Making and turned to the chapter on antidotes. There was Golpalott's Third Law, stated word for word as Hermione had recited it, but not a single illuminating note in the Prince's hand to explain what it meant. Apparently, the Prince, like Hermione, had no difficulty understanding it. . . . "It took Harry only five minutes to realize that his reputation as the best potion-maker in the class was crashing around his ears. Slughorn had peered hopefully into his cauldron on the first circuit of the dungeon, preparing to exclaim in delight as he usually did, and instead had withdrawn his head hastily, coughing, as the smell of bad eggs overwhelmed him" (376). Meanwhile, Hermione is "decanting the mysteriously separated ingredients of her poison into ten different crystal vials." Then Harry finds the bezoar note scrawled across a list of antidotes, and is reminded, surprise, of the first-ever lesson in Snape's class: "A stone taken from the stomach of a goat, which will protect from most poisons" 377). (BTW, I think Snape actually said "against," not "from," but the point is that, finally, Harry is learning, from Snape and Snape, Inc., what he should have learned from Snape along, especially given the lessons on antidotes in GoF. "It was not an answer to the Golpalott problem, and had Snape been their teacher, he would not have dared to do it, but this was a moment for desperate measures" (377). > Valky: > > The way I see it is that Harry is rushing things, trying to squeeze everything he can out of a short moment between now and his ultimate showdown with Voldemort, testing the HBP's Potions notes under the supervision of a competent teacher is actually one of his wiser decisions in doing that. Carol responds: Aside from the first lesson, in which he tries out the hints and finds that they work (and, by the fourth lesson, have led to a reputation for Potions brilliance that he knows is unearned), when does he *test* them out? He knows that they'll work and that he'll get Slughorn's praise, and he keeps his old Potions book disguised as a new one to insure that he keeps on getting that help (and the jinxes and hexes as well). But where and when does Slughorn *supervise* him? Does hopefully sniffing his causdron and coughing at the smell of rotten eggs count as "supervision of a competent teacher"? Unlike Snape, who prowls the classroom making sure that students are following directions and pointing out exactly what they've done wrong when the potion is the wrong color, Slughorn seems to do virtually nothing in the class except assign potions straight from an antiquated book (as opposed to the improved potions that Snape casts on the board with his wand). When and where, aside from conveniently mentioning why the pepperming leaf the HBP suggested is a good addition, does Slughorn help Harry understand the theory? He only praises Harry's "nerve" for presenting him with a Bezoar and notes what Harry should already have learned from Snape (and finally remembers, thanks to HBP!Snape), that a Bezoar is an antidote to most poisons. Hermione, who has half-finished her antidote comprising fifty-two ingredients (with no help from any textbook because she understands both the principle and the procedure) gets no credit at all. Forgive me for indulging my feelings here, Mike and Steve and Valky, but it's monstrously unfair. And even Slughorn notes that bezoars "don't work on everything" and "it's still worth knowing how to mix antidotes" (378)--which Hermione has learned how to do and Harry hasn't. Magpie: > He doesn't seem to be rushing things at all, to me. He seems to spend the year at a fairly relaxed place, studying the Prince's book because it interests him (mostly for the spells and the Prince as a made-up person) not because he's desperately trying to gain skills for Voldemort. It's a handy excuse to make when Hermione's on his back, but everything you mention here (that he wants to test out all this under the supervision of a teacher and learn as much stuff as he can before he meets Voldemort) doesn't sound like HBP!Harry at all. > Carol: Exactly. He test out the *spells* but not the potions improvements, which he merely uses in class and takes credit for. (Imagine if he had somehow ended up with the HBP's book and Snape had still been the Potions Master. OW!) > > Valky: > Harry is trying to get good and get it fast in case tomorrow is the day Voldemort comes for him. Carol: Is he? I don't see it, sorry. And if that's his goal, he's failed dismally given the disastrous results when he tries to do the antidote experiment. *Snape* teaches him about bezoars, and thanks to HBP!Snape, he finally gets it, luckily for Ron. But as far as potion-making in general and potions theory is concerned, he's exactly where he would have been with the unannotated book. He can add ingredients and stir them with his wand. Heck, I could do that (only, of course, I'm not magical so it wouldn't work.) > Magpie: To me, to be honest, I find it far worse to claim Harry is what Slughorn claims and deserves that praise than to say he doesn't. It makes me think of the Dursleys turning everything Dudders does into something good. Carol: Exactly. *Harry* know that he's not a Potions genius. So do Ron and Hermione (and Draco, who's smouldering with anger at the end of the antidote lesson, just as Harry would be if Draco had gotten away with that cheeky pseudo-solution). Would anyone be praising Draco's resourcefulness if the book had fallen into his hands rather than Harry's? I think not, even though he's quite literally under a death threat to himself and his parents, giving up Quidditch and not doing his Transfiguration homework so that he can work on the cabinet. Not commendable, of course. I'm not feeling sorry for Draco for getting himself into such a mess, assuming that he volunteered the information on the Vanishing Cabinets out of revenge for his father's arrest, but he *is* operating under duress and Harry, Chosen One or no, is noth thinking about death or danger that I can see. At any rate, since Harry himself admits that the HBP is the genius and he's just getting credit for using the results of someone else's research, I don't see why people (not you, Magpie!) are still doing the same thing Slughorn is doing and crediting him with a talent he doesn't have and hard work he hasn't done, alternately with "it's okay to take shortcuts because he's dying"--a thought we never hear from Harry himself. > > Steve: > 'Golpalotts Method' was implied in the potions lesson, but it wasn't stated (as far as I remember). Carol: Slughorn, that "competent teacher," doesn't explain it. Neither does the HBP, who doesn't need to make notes to himself because he understands it perfectly well. Under ordinary circumstances, Hermione would have explained it to Harry and Ron, but she's understandably miffed that Harry is taking shortcuts and not really understanding the material. (Ernie Macmillan does, BTW: he's muttering "Specialis Revelio" under his breath. Hermione is doing it nonverbally. I'll bet she can do the DADA spells nonverbally, too, beating Harry out in his own specialty because she hasn't let resentment of Snape prevent her from learning from him, either in Potions or in DADA.) Steve: True Harry did not apply 'Golpalotts Method', but he did find a fast and practical solution to a very real and likely problem. And as far as I'm concerned, he learned that particular lesson better than any of the other students, because Harry taught himself, aided by the 'Book', to find practical solutions to practical problems; not theoretical solutions to theoretical problems. Carol: Harry taught himself, *aided* by the book? Harry came up with a fast and practical solution? That's not how I read it. Harry attempted to do the experiment, failed miserably because he didn't know the theory, and resorted to "desperate measures" at the end of the lesson to avoid losing the reputation for brilliance in potion-making that was "falling around his ears." He did, thank God, *finally* learn the lesson that Snape had been trying to get him to absorb for five years: when someone is poisoned (unless it's a poison that doesn't have an antidote, as the green potion in the cave appears to be) "just stuff a bezoar down their throat." Granted, it's a good thing that Harry *did* take that shortcut on the Potions experiment because had he not done so, Slughorn (who's about as much help in a crisis as Winky) would not have had a Bezoar in his Potions kit. But Harry would not have known about Bezoars at all if it hadn't been for Snape and his teenage incarnation in the Potions book. > > Magpie: > Kids have been trying to get away with "but what does it matter how I got the answer when I got it right!" for years. The point being that you're supposed to be learning what you're being taught in class today, not do it the way you learned in sixth grade. Which is, remember, what Harry is doing. Bezoars aren't a new thing. The practical solution that Harry learned that day was the one the rest of the class learned years before. They tried to move on to learning a more complicated law. I think we can be pretty sure Snape would have taken points for any student answering with "cheek" instead of an antidote brewed according to what he was teaching. > > Steve: > So, it is hard to say Harry cheated on something that is essentially > meaningless. > > Magpie: > I'm sure all the teachers on the list appreciate your putting them in their place there.:-) Carol responds: Thanks, Magpie. As a former teacher, I appreciate that. I would hope that students retain what they're taught into adulthood. In any case, teachers do expect a student to know what he's doing, or they did in my day, which is why a math student, for example, is expected to show his work rather than using a calculator. But, as we've repeatedly shown, Harry isn't doing his own work. He's not conducting research out of class. He's using the HBP's brilliant ideas, the result of *his* out-of-class research and experimentation, and claiming them as his own. And when he hides the Potions book, he's back to square one. Nor does his reputation for being a Potions genius help him get the memory from Slughorn, whose reaction when Harry states (immediately after the antidote lesson) that he thought there might be more to the memory is to scream "Then you were wrong, werne't you? WRONG!" (380) and to stop holding Slug Club meetings. Now I, for one, am glad that Harry had the book and that it jogged Harry's memory of Snape's first Potions lesson. I'm glad that Felix Felicis helped him get the memory and helped protect Harry's friends on the night that Draco let the DEs into Hogwarts. But none of that makes Harry a Potions genius or makes it right (on a scale of kumquats, not watermelons) for him to claim someone else's ideas as his own, even implicitly, as he admits to himself and Hermione that he's doing. Just because an action has good consequences doesn't make the action right. Otherwise, we should be praising Draco for complaining to Daddy about Hagrid and Buckbeak and the Committee for the Disposal of Dangerous Creatures (or whatever it's called) for sentencing Buckbeak to death and sending Macnair to Hogwarts to execute him. After all, if it hadn't been for those actions, Sirius Black would never have escaped on Buckbeak. All's well that ends well, right? (Please don't take my words at face value here!) Carol, who thinks that all this defense of Harry's admittedly small sin of omission on the grounds of "well, he's dying!" or "he's really a Potions genius doing his own work" boils down to a reluctance to credit the real genius, the HBP himself, Severus Snape, with his own brilliant ideas and research From shamyn at pacbell.net Wed Feb 28 16:31:45 2007 From: shamyn at pacbell.net (Draeconin) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:31:45 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Deathly Hollows In-Reply-To: <701489.89762.qm@web62007.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <701489.89762.qm@web62007.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <45E5AE71.3070506@pacbell.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165543 Theresa McKee wrote: > Hello Everyone. > > I thought I should introduce myself first since I am new. My name is Theresa and like everyone else I enjoy HP. > > Here is my question. Deathly Hollows = Godric Hollows (I hope I got the name right) the location in which James and Lily was murdered, where it all began. > I think you've got the spelling wrong. It's 'Deathly Hallows'. 'Hallowed' means 'made holy', so the title would translate as something like 'Deathly Holys'. Doesn't make sense to me, but... Draeconin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 17:45:05 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:45:05 -0000 Subject: What about James' sacrifice? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165544 Jenni from Alabama wrote: > > James gave his life trying to protect not just Harry but Lily's life as well, yet his sacrifice is not shown in the books as 'significant' by JKR, only Lily's. My husband, who is the one that got me hooked on Harry Potter to begin with, has always been a little bit offended by this. > > A mother's love is powerful stuff, but what about the love of a father and husband? Carol responds: I think the answer is fairly complex and ties in with the themes of mother love (illustrated by everyone from Mrs. Crouch to Narcissa Malfoy) and blood magic. But in simplest terms, James was fighting Voldemort, dying in battle to protect his family, whereas Lily wasn't fighting at all: she was offering her life in exchange for Harry's. So James didn't *sacrifice* his life in the sense that Lily did. Nor would Lily have sacrificed her life if she had fought back as James did. If she had resisted Voldemort instead of stepping in front of him, Harry would have died. That she's Harry's mother rather than his father is unimportant in terms of the ancient magic invoked. What matters is the difference in their actions. Carol, who sees the difference between James and Lily at Godric's Hollow as the difference between a hero and a martyr From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Feb 28 18:07:40 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:07:40 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hollows In-Reply-To: <45E5AE71.3070506@pacbell.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165545 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Draeconin wrote: Theresa McKee: > > Hello Everyone. > > I thought I should introduce myself first since I am new. My name is Theresa and like everyone else I enjoy HP. > > Here is my question. Deathly Hollows = Godric Hollows (I hope I got the name right) the location in which James and Lily was murdered, where it all began. Draeconin: > I think you've got the spelling wrong. It's 'Deathly Hallows'. > 'Hallowed' means 'made holy', so the title would translate as something > like 'Deathly Holys'. Doesn't make sense to me, but... Geoff: The question of "Hallows" has been discussed before. I looked at the grammatical possibilities in message 165123 which you might like to glance at; I felt that, in this context, it referred to a holy place. On the other hand, "Hollow" - as in Godric's Hollow - is a word met with in English place names, usually a shallow valley or a dell. It was probably wooded originally but by the time James and Lily came to live there, it seems to refer to a village or similar settlement. Some of us hold the opinion that it may be connected with Godric Gryffindor and, hence, there may be some sort of yet-unrevealed connection between him and the Potters. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 18:14:11 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:14:11 -0000 Subject: Did Voldemort make use of a Horcrux already? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165546 Inge wrote: > > I'm wondering if maybe Voldemort already used one of the 6 > Horcruxes which he created. Carol responds: As I understand it, a wizard who makes a Horcrux (or multiple Horcruxes) doesn't *use* the Horcrux, per se. Its mere existence "anchors" his soul to the earth, which is presumably why most of Voldie's Horcruxes are made of imperishable gold, well-hidden, and protected by curses. The diary, which (IMO) already had a memory in it before it became a Horcrux, was a powerful magical object in its own right, designed to release the Basilisk and "continue Salazar Slytherin's noble work." If "using" a Horcrux involved providing himself with a new body like the one he would have had if Diary!Tom had succeeded in using Ginny's soul to give himself a new body, Voldemort would not have been vaporozed at Godric's Hollow. As it is, the multiple Horcruxes merely kept his own mutilated soul from passing beyond the Veil when he was struck by the deflected Avada Kedavra. If Harry tries to kill him (assuming that he can't find some better way to destroy LV) while LV has even one Horcrux, the process will just start over again. That's why all the Horcruxes have to be destroyed--to make Voldemort mortal. Carol, still wondering what would have happened if Diary!Tom had encountered Vapormort From annemehr at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 18:28:05 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:28:05 -0000 Subject: Did Voldemort make use of a Horcrux already? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165547 Inge queried: > As most other subjects, this has probably been discussed earlier, > but I'm wondering if maybe Voldemort already used one of the 6 > Horcruxes which he created. > > What makes me ask is parts of the following speaches from Voldemort > in GOF, chap The Death Eaters > > 1) (p 562): "And then I ask myself, but how could they have believed > I would not rise again? They, who knew the steps I took, long ago, > to gueard myself against mortal death? They, who had seen proofs of > the immensity of my power, in the times when I was mightier than any > wizard living?" > > and later > > 2) (p 566): "I was ripped from my body, I was less than spirit, less > than the meanest ghost... but still, I was alive. What I was, even I > do not know... I, who have gone further than anybody along the path > that leads to immortality. You know my goal - to conquer death. And > now, I was tested, AND IT APPEARED THAT ONE OR MORE OF MY > EXPERIMENTS HAD WORKED... (my highlights) for I had not been killed, > though the curse should have done it." > > Ok, to me it appears that at the time Voldemort was hit by the > backfiring AK, he may have "died" and lost the soul-piece inside > him, which was at that exact moment replaced by one of the Horcruxes. > > Too far off? > > Inge Annemehr: Well, it's my understanding that the soul-piece that was still inside Voldemort when the AK hit him *was* the vapor that spent all those years in Albania, because it was tied to Earth by the pieces in Horcruxes. That vapor-in-Albania one was the soul-piece that Voldemort knew as "I". (I'm almost sure JKR confirmed this in an interview somewhere, but I couldn't find it.) On the other hand, he never seemed to know that the Diary had been destroyed; I take it that this is because there is no self-knowledge in those detached pieces -- so that, bits of Voldemort's soul they may be, but they are not *Voldemort himself*. On the other hand, the GoF quotes that you mention above make me think that Voldemort had tried other means of cheating death *besides* his Horcruxes. For one thing, if DD is to be believed (yes, I know, "if"), the DEs don't know about the Hxes, and for another, "one or more experiments" sounds like he tried various *types* of things rather than just meaning multiple Hxes. Reading your post, I remembered this bit of the post-HBP Leaky/Mugglenet interview: "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 was a reason it was in there, and you will see that." I wonder if the reason LV was able to get that fetal body was the result of some other of his "experiments." Even though, it seems like there is already too much to deal with in DH without adding that in. Annemehr, hoping that the people are right who surmise that the resolution of the Hx problem will take rather less page time than might be expected From Vexingconfection at aol.com Wed Feb 28 15:55:19 2007 From: Vexingconfection at aol.com (vexingconfection) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 15:55:19 -0000 Subject: Book seven can not be the last book because In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165548 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "funkeginger" wrote:>> I dont think that the Deathly Hallows can be the last book because there is too much to do.Harry has to find four Horcruxes, then he has to try and kill Voldemort. It's too much to do in one book . JKR only makes most of the books max 780 pages . You can't just do that in that many pages. Also we have to see what happens to Harry and the others after V dies. Most people would not mind seeing what happens in the future to them up to ten years at least. We also have to find out who RAB is and see who DD's new replacement is so all in all it would have to be alot longer then the other books at least 1000 pages . But I don't think it would be as good if she just crams it all in to one book. I still will love it but not as much as the others. I also heard rumors that HP is going to die in this book.I can't imagine her killing Harry at the end. I think she still will do one more book, but just make us think the Deathly Hallows is the last.<< vexingconfection: I didn't think JKR would kill HP off either, then I read that after this book she had a rendezvous with her close friend Steven King. This is not only something King would do but it's something his famed author did in Misery to rid himself of a reoccuring character. There were similarities between JKR and King's author. Both wrote to specific audiences and both wrote serials based on a character they felt were not of the depth they could create. Kings author killed off his heroine in hopes of never going back -I think there is the possibility that JKR will do the same. Some call it burning bridges others call it scotched earth. Harry can't live-it would be anti climactical for the characters to live happily ever after. This all started as a children's book-then it grew with it's readers. I think it's totally possible Harry dies. The question is will there be spin offs. Does JKR kill him off or write the new Tom Sawyer and Huck Fin? vexingconfection From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 18:42:20 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:42:20 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's attitude (was Re: On lying and cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165549 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > Are we supposed to think that Slytherinis tactics are not so bad, that > cunning in a good cause is not only acceptable but necessary (think > DDM!Snape as double agent)? > Carol, who still doesn't approve of Harry the Hero stealing someone > else's glory, which has no connection in *Harry's* mind with the war > against Voldemort, but fearing that DD and JKR might justify it for > exactly those Slytherinish reasons > Well, that raises several points. First of all, it raises the point of how deeply JKR is thinking in any given scene. I suspect it is very dangerous to assume that a given scene or set of actions has any necessary resonance with deep themes or developments. I know that JKR has talked a lot about how much she has thought about things, but frankly there are all too many points in the books when character is sacrificed for purposes of making the plot go the right way. JKR's has thought a lot about her plot, but not so much about keeping her characters consistent and believable, and I seriously doubt she has thought about themes and "morals" to the extent that many would like her to -- indeed, she has often implied that she has not, given her professed horror of preaching and her denial that she sets out to teach any particular lessons with a given book. I think she is being at least disingenuous with many of her denials (she reminds me of lay preachers I know who proclaim their horror of preaching all the way down the aisle to the pulpit where they fully intend to give an impassioned sermon) but still it may be very dangerous indeed to read too much "theme" into any given development. For instance in this case she needed to get Slughorn's memory introduced into the plot and the scenes with DD urging Harry on may well be just convenient devices to accomplish her goal, greater themes be d***ed. It also raises the question of just exactly what is meant by a "Slytherinish" reason? We are given two different views of Slytherin by none other than the Sorting Hat. One view is that Slytherin is the house of ambition, the other that it is the house of pure blood. (We are also given two very different views of Hufflepuff, but that's another issue.) Neither of those views necessarily has much to do with how one approaches the rules. It is entirely possible to be very ambitous and respectful of the rules (although I grant that the best example we have of that, Percy, is not a Slytherin, although if you want to argue for the adult Snapey-poo, hotay) and entirely possible to value pure blood and also respect the rules. In terms of Gryffindor, the house of courage, it is entirely possible to be brave and no respecter of the rules (almost all the heros match this) and entirely possible to be brave and treasure the rules (McG, I suppose). Even craftiness, although associated with the serpent that is the Slytherin emblem, is not necessarily a trait that matches either description of the house. One can be very ambitious and not at all crafty or clever (I grant you we are back to Percy,), and one can be very brave and extremely crafty (Hermione fits this bill). Needless to say pureblood and craftiness need not go together at all (Crabbe and Goyle). So does this mean very much? I personally doubt it. I think that JKR had at best only rather vague ideas of the houses in mind when she started, her protestations notwithstanding. Judging by the early notes we have seen (the ones where Neville was a Hufflepuff), she originally intended to have iconic characters from each house (Neville the Hufflepuff, probably Hermione the Ravenclaw, and wasn't that Weasley cousin originally going to be a Slytherin? -- maybe Percy picked up a storyline that originally went to her), but when it became more practically efficient to group all the heros into Gryffindor and all the antagonists into Slytherin the foci of the houses became -- blurred, shall we say. House unity will probably figure somehow into DH. Maybe Ron and Hermione will be Head Boy/Head Girl (with Harry and Ginny filling those roles once Harry returns to Hogwarts after Voldy's death). That would give them something to do other than trailing around after Harry as he hunts horcruxes. But I doubt in the end whether the unity theme will make the house characteristics very much clearer. Lupinlore, who thinks that JKRs putative original formulation, although somewhat cookie-cutter, might have had a lot going for it From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Feb 28 18:59:50 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 13:59:50 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unbreakable Vows Message-ID: <15239273.1172689191057.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165550 From: Zara >> 6) Therefore (second conclusion, combining #3 and #5): The vow is >what the person making the vow understands it to be. > >zgirnius: >I disagree with 6). A person could make sure they understand what is >being asked before taking a Vow. But I still think it would be >possible for them not to know. Suppose Snape was pretty sure >Voldemort had asked Draco for an ice-cream cone. But he's wrong! "Pretty sure" doesn't make it. Snape may not have known what Draco's mission was, but he knew damned well that he had promised to complete it for Draco, should Draco fail. Yes, even with my logic, it is possible to make an unbreakable vow to do something when you don't know exactly what it is, as long as it is your intent to find out and follow through. It's just a stupid thing to do. And logic does NOT dictate that it's a way to weasel out. Now, if Cissy had told Snape that Draco's mission was to get Tommy an ice cream cone, and got Snape to promise to follow through if Draco can't do it, it is logical to assume that Snape's responsibility is to get Tommy an ice cream cone. Otherwise, UV's can be too easily abused to make them a useful spell. Bart From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Feb 28 18:43:08 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:43:08 -0700 Subject: Why Snape isn't a good teacher References: Message-ID: <023501c75b68$4aec8750$c0affea9@MOBILE> No: HPFGUIDX 165551 > I have a question on this topic: If the HBP's methods were superior to > what was being taught, why didn't Snape teach those methods, and keep > using them himself while he was the Potions professor? Plot hole? > > Draeconin Funny, I started writing a lengthy post on the subject before you asked this question! I have finally finished it up, and so here it is: All this talk about how Harry uses this (HBP's copy of the textbook) I think is a distraction from some points we may have missed. I haven't read all of this thread, so it may have been brought up before, but something significant comes through when we see Harry using the HBP's notes to great success. Slughorn hasn't been teaching potions for a while- he hasn't been using the Standard Book of Spells text for years on end to know if they are particularly "good" potions, but he knows when he sees the results that Harry's potions better than the other students. I think of these "book of spells" as a cookbook. You can have 2 cookbooks, side by side, and can be following almost the same recipe for something such as a cake, but little things like creaming the eggs into the sugar, or separating an egg and whipping up the white to be added back into the recipe at a later time can make a noticeable difference in the lightness and texture of the cake, even if all the ingredients and basic steps are the same, and it was cooked for the same length of time. Those "points of skill" define the good chef from the casual cooker. Slughorn hasn't been teaching potions recently, so maybe he hasn't really evaluated this text thoroughly. If he did, and compared it with other items on the wizard book market, he might find a potions book that is more updated to include the tricks of the trade to get better results. But, since he steps in last minute and reuses the same text as the previous teacher, he really has no way of telling that Harry is obviously using some "better source" to enhance that textbook. He would have no way of telling if Harry is using a version of today's cliff notes, or if the skill came naturally. Having known Lilly, he just presumes that Harry is gifted with natural skill. That, plus part of his "ego" revolves around "building up" students for his own benefit, so that later he can say that "he was their teacher", so that part of the glory for having "made" that child who he or she turns out to be belongs to him. Slughorn has his own selfish motives for praising Harry; his apparent blindness for where Harry got this knowledge isn't for nothing, because later he wants to take credit for being Harry's potions teacher. Slughorn may have known the truth all along- it wouldn't have been the first time he kept a student's secrets! Snape, on the other hand, knows better. Had it been him teaching that year, he would have KNOWN that the Standard Book of Spells produces mediocre results, and that Harry's results weren't typical at all. He would have recognized that Harry was getting "help" from an additional source. Yes, everyone can get a cake that tastes good, but to get a wonderful cake, you have to deviate from those instructions in small but very significant steps, and those small deviations are never part of Snape's class. (The flattening of those pods with the flat of the blade is a trick very similar to rolling a lemon around to bruise it up before slicing it in half to juice it.) Thing about it- Snape HAS this knowledge in his head- it's been there all the years he's been teaching- WHY does he never share his "expertise" in class with his students? As a cook, if I see someone else cooking in front of me, I can't resist showing off those little tricks to get better results, and yet Snape never teaches his students these things. He never gives away that there is a "slightly better way" to do this. Instead, he knows the students are using a mediocre text, and he grades them solely based on this text's results. In reality, if Snape were a good teacher at all, ALL of the used texts would show these same notes and updating from the constant years of classes, or he would have flat wrote a new set of texts to highlight his great knowledge base. I think there is an explanation for why he does this, why Snape plays this "slightly less than Superbly Brilliant Snape" in public, and it revolves around my view of who Snape is. I hate to say that, because I detest all the theories of "Dumbledore's Man" Snape or "Pure Evil" Snape, because I think none of them even come close to hitting the mark. We have it in canon that Snape is a double agent, and has been the entire series. Dumbledore thinks Snape is working for him. Voldemort thinks Snape is working for him. To be a successful double agent, one must never give away the full truth, and one must always retain cards up your sleeve or tricks in your hat that you can use to get out of sticky situations when someone asks you to explain discrepancies in your behavior. A double agent is never fully truthful to either master, for that would end the double agent role. Thus, Snape would not have the incentive, as another teacher would, to really help the students succeed to their fullest. His loyalties lie elsewhere. A real teacher would teach the kids all he or she knows, and would impart ALL of their knowledge, but Double Agent Snape can't afford to give that much away. He's trying for a different position- the DADA job, so why show off to be the "Best Potions Teacher That Ever Was"? That would be counter productive. We know he has the talent for that, but in demonstrating that level of knowledge in the classroom would hinder the desire to get the other job, and maybe even hinder the direction that has been keeping Voldemort's trust in him. He can't love his students, love his job without compromising Voldemort's tough stares that probe into Snape's loyalties. To be that involved with the students would betray that Double Agent position. I can see Voldemort saying to an attached Snape, "Your loyalties belong to ME- not your students, not to Hogwarts, and not to Dumbledore! You shall love me, and none other!" I think this shows up in more than just the Potions class. He never gives his caring concern to Harry in Occulemency lessons, either. He certainly hides his skills and talents there, and I don't think messing Harry up in that subject was pure accident. Dumbledore presumes this "goof" of Snape's is mere trouble over forgiving, but Snape needs to keep his loyalties to Voldemort in tact for the Double Agent role to continue to work. Giving his "all" to Harry in that arena wouldn't have pleased Voldemort, and I think Snape is perfectly willing to further along Dumbledore's slightly misguided theory because it masks his real motives. Both Masters are playing games here- DD uses Slughorn to get what he wants (the memory) and Voldemort certainly uses people in more sinister ways, as we've seen again and again in the books. I would have no doubt that Snape didn't teach to his full measure in DADA as well, for much the same reasons. He can't afford to tell all he knows! DD knows some of Snape's true abilities, and so he's content to have him around to save him and other students from dangers, but even then, I don't think DD fully knows Snape as well as he thinks he does- in fact, for a Double Agent position to work, surely DD must realize that Snape must have secrets that he cannot even tell DD without compromising his position. Thus, I think all the way through the books, we've never seen the real Snape to even judge his character. We've only seen what he needs to propagate his Double Agent role. He's not evil, he's not good- he's a spy. You will never see his real hand, nor will you ever get to see all the cards he's holding. Shelley From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Feb 28 19:10:53 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:10:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Deathly Hollows Message-ID: <2149899.1172689854218.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 165552 From: Draeconin >I think you've got the spelling wrong. It's 'Deathly Hallows'. >'Hallowed' means 'made holy', so the title would translate as something >like 'Deathly Holys'. Doesn't make sense to me, but... I'm still betting on the long shot I came up with on day one: Sirius is going to be yelling from beyond the veil, "Hallowwwww!" Hallowwwww!" Bart From sweetlittleangel113 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 18:33:13 2007 From: sweetlittleangel113 at yahoo.com (Theresa McKee) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:33:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Deathly Hollows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <8004.87802.qm@web62013.mail.re1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 165553 Geoff Bannister wrote: >> The question of "Hallows" has been discussed before. I looked at the grammatical possibilities in message 165123 which you might like to glance at; I felt that, in this context, it referred to a holy place. On the other hand, "Hollow" - as in Godric's Hollow - is a word met with in English place names, usually a shallow valley or a dell. Some of us hold the opinion that it may be connected with Godric Gryffindor and, hence, there may be some sort of yet-unrevealed connection between him and the Potters. << Theresa: I will chalk that up to a bad spelling day - probably why I quit writing. I always believed that to be the case as well, especially since it was Gryffindor's sword Harry pulled out of the hat in CoS. For me personally I feel as if there is some connection to the two names, even if the spelling is different. It would seem poetic justice to have the story come to an end in the same place it began. And since Geoff kindly mentioned it was discussed prior I will kindly say no more on this topic :: Grins :: From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Feb 28 21:58:07 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:58:07 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book seven can not be the last book because References: Message-ID: <004a01c75b83$88c406a0$c0affea9@MOBILE> No: HPFGUIDX 165555 ----- Original Message ----- From: "vexingconfection" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 8:55 AM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book seven can not be the last book because > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "funkeginger" > wrote:>> I dont think that the Deathly Hallows can be the last book > because there is too much to do.Harry has to find four Horcruxes, > then he has to try and kill Voldemort. It's too much to do in one > book . JKR only makes most of the books max 780 pages . You can't > just do that in that many pages. Also we have to see what happens to > Harry and the others after V dies. Most people would not mind seeing > what happens in the future to them up to ten years at least. > We also have to find out who RAB is and see who DD's new replacement > is so all in all it would have to be alot longer then the other books > at least 1000 pages . But I don't think it would be as good if she > just crams it all in to one book. I still will love it but not as > much as the others. I also heard rumors that HP is going to die in > this book.I can't imagine her killing Harry at the end. I think she > still will do one more book, but just make us think the Deathly > Hallows is the last.<< > > vexingconfection: > I didn't think JKR would kill HP off either, then I read that after > this book she had a rendezvous with her close friend Steven King. > This is not only something King would do but it's something his famed > author did in Misery to rid himself of a reoccuring character. There > were similarities between JKR and King's author. Both wrote to > specific audiences and both wrote serials based on a character they > felt were not of the depth they could create. Kings author killed off > his heroine in hopes of never going back -I think there is the > possibility that JKR will do the same. Some call it burning bridges > others call it scotched earth. Harry can't live-it would be anti > climactical for the characters to live happily ever after. This all > started as a children's book-then it grew with it's readers. I think > it's totally possible Harry dies. The question is will there be spin > offs. Does JKR kill him off or write the new Tom Sawyer and Huck Fin? > > vexingconfection > > > > Lots of great events happening in summer 2007, so start making your travel > plans now! > > Phoenix Rising: New Orleans, May 17 - 21 http://www.thephoenixrises.org/ > Enlightening 2007: Philadelphia, July 12 - 15 > http://enlightening2007.org/ > Sectus: London, July 19 - 22 http://www.sectus.org/index.php > Prophecy 2007: Toronto, August 2 - 5 http://hp2007.org/ > > 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 nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Feb 28 22:11:27 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 22:11:27 -0000 Subject: On the trivial and the profound. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165556 >Eggplant: > That is the mother load! If you can find a RATIONAL reason a good > Snape would make that vow you will instantly turn me from being a > Snape hater into a Snape lover. Neri: Agreed. However, the vow doesn't seem much more rational from the POV of ESE!Snape. True, ESE!Snape wouldn't mind killing Dumbledore, but as he says himself he's going against the Dark Lord's orders in making the vow. And moreover, he also puts himself in a big risk, because if Draco tries killing Dumbledore on his own and fails or gets hurt before Snape can reach them, then Snape is dead. So it looks like Snape has reasons of his own to make the vow, which by definition means OFH. While I frequently sound like I'm joking when promoting ACID POPS, I must say that I don't know of any other theory that is even close to explaining why did Snape make the vow. And as a nice bonus ACID POPS also explains another unsolved mystery: what did Draco suddenly have against Snape in HBP, after liking him so much for five books. > Eggplant: > Voldemort's plan was to trick Harry to go to the ministry, but when > Snape showed up Harry was already caught by Umbrage so Snape figured > the plan had failed, it never occurred to him that Harry would manage > to escape and make it all the way to the ministry. With the plan > canceled anyway it couldn't hurt to tell the Order of the Phoenix > what Harry said, in fact he had to if he wanted to remain a spy for > Voldemort. Ron, Hermione, Neville, Luna and about a dozen other people > heard Harry talk to Snape about Padfoot, and sooner or later the Order > would hear about it and wonder why Snape didn't tell them immediately. > Neri: A good point. However, Snape actually contacted the Order *twice* that night (or at least this is what Dumbledore believed). The first time was indeed after leaving Umbridge's office, when he checked on Sirius in 12GP. This call alone might be enough for ESE!Snape to prevent the Order from suspecting him. However, Snape warned the Order again several hours later, when Harry did not return from the forest, and this second call is more difficult to explain using the ESE theory. There's also the question of why doesn't ESE!Snape also warn Voldemort, immediately after leaving Umbridge's office, that the operation must be canceled, and instead lets Lucius and eleven other DEs risk their necks in the Ministry for no reason. IMO Snape's strange behavior here strongly suggests that he has his own agenda, and that he's torn between contradicting objectives. Neri From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Feb 28 22:14:05 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 15:14:05 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did Voldemort make use of a Horcrux already? References: Message-ID: <006001c75b85$c2fd0bd0$c0affea9@MOBILE> No: HPFGUIDX 165557 > Reading your post, I remembered this bit of the post-HBP > Leaky/Mugglenet interview: > > "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 was a > reason it was in there, and you will see that." > > I wonder if the reason LV was able to get that fetal body was the > result of some other of his "experiments." Even though, it seems > like there is already too much to deal with in DH without adding that > in. > > Annemehr, > hoping that the people are right who surmise that the resolution of > the Hx problem will take rather less page time than might be expected Shelley adds: It's my thought that because RJ uses the words "fetal", that he had been "born again" of sorts. It's a mystery whether he died instantly and one of the Horcruxes was activated to save his soul/life, or whether he was "just alive enough" to have enough strength to call up a temporary spell to keep him alive for just a little while longer to be able to use the Horcrux. In canon, we see in the Department of Mysteries one of the Death Eater's heads sink into a liquid, and his head goes from an adult to a baby, and then back again. I think Voldie used something like that regenerate himself so that he wasn't "vapormort" as we had all supposed, but started over as a blob of goo that grew and took shape of a human, gradually getting to look more like a person, so that he indeed would have many "lives" to live through. We see Wormtail needing to "milk Nagini"- milk is used for a baby, is it not? We knew that his shape then was not big enough to be seen from around the chair- he was little then, but still pretty disgusting looking, as Wormtail cringed when he had to look at Voldemort. It wouldn't be too much to add to DH, if Harry or someone else does manage to "kill" Voldemort again, but that this time we "witness it"- this process of regeneration take place before our eyes. That would reemphasize that Harry needs to off Voldemort for good, so that he doesn't keep coming back like a cat with nine lives. Shelley From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Feb 28 23:53:54 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 23:53:54 -0000 Subject: Lying and Cheating & Potions!Genius.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 165558 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > he just wants to finish his potions without > losing his unearned reputation for brilliance, which is why he > switches the covers and gives Slughorn the new book Valky: And Magpie was just telling me how nobody was trying to say this at all. > > Look how desperate he is when he doesn't understand Golpalott's Law, Valky: He's about to make his first attempt to ask Slughorn about the Horcruxes. "this was a moment for desperate measures" (377). It was typical Harry Luck, he goes to Potions prepared for another roar of approval from Slughorn which of course he expects to be able to turn to hs advantage in his quest to get the memory; and when he gets there, it all goes south. He's about to lose his reputation and, for all he knows, the memory along with it. Afterward Harry does say to Ron that he intended to soften Slughorn up so he could ask him about the memory. He doesn't even believe the Bezoar is going to work, but he has to try, from his POV at the time his reputation is all he's got. Its the Felix Felicis that prompts him to realise that his mother is the right angle to use, but he doesn't have FF in him in the classroom, hence his gets desperate to keep the only advantage he thinks he has. > > > Valky: > > > The way I see it is that Harry is rushing things, trying to > squeeze everything he can out of a short moment between now and his > ultimate showdown with Voldemort, testing the HBP's Potions notes > under the supervision of a competent teacher is actually one of his > wiser decisions in doing that. > > Carol responds: > Aside from the first lesson, in which he tries out the hints and > finds that they work (and, by the fourth lesson, have led to a > reputation for Potions brilliance that he knows is unearned), when > does he *test* them out? He knows that they'll work and that he'll > get Slughorn's praise, and he keeps his old Potions book disguised > as a new one to insure that he keeps on getting that help (and the > jinxes and hexes as well). Valky: Again the thing that 'nobody is trying to say'... What does Harry want with a reputation Carol? I'm talking HP series Harry, here. The Boy who Lived, The Chosen One, DADA juggernaut, School Quidditch Star... He's got enough reputations already, and he doesn't want any of them, already, what's yet another reputation going to mean to this boy, honestly? I've already corrected myself on the "test" part in another post as I failed to articulate what was in my mind the first time round. You may want to check that post for my answer. > Carol: > But where and when does Slughorn *supervise* him? Does hopefully > sniffing his causdron and coughing at the smell of rotten eggs count > as "supervision of a competent teacher"? Valky: Que? You for some reason think it doesn't? Supervision is an important aspect of the duty of a prac subject teacher. If the potion gets too excited and becomes a risk to the students, it's Slughorn's job to know how to avoid a crisis. I just don't understand where you're coming from. Of course the Classroom is a supervised environment. Or what do you think it is? Carol: > When and where, aside from conveniently mentioning why the > peppermint leaf the HBP suggested is a good addition, does Slughorn > help Harry understand the theory? Valky: I never actually said Slughorn was helping Harry to understand the theory. What I said was that the notes in the margin were helping Harry understand as well as apply the theory. If they weren't then why would he have expected as much from the book in the Golpalotts law class? "There was Golpalotts Third Law, stated word for word as Hermione had recited it, but not a single illuminating note in the Prince's hand to explain what it meant." Carol: > He only praises Harry's "nerve" for presenting > him with a Bezoar and notes what Harry should already have learned > from Snape (and finally remembers, thanks to HBP!Snape), that a > Bezoar is an antidote to most poisons. Valky: Actually, he notes specifically that a Bezoar was an antidote to all the poisons being studied in that class that day. As well as reminding everyone that they are rare which is the extent of their unreliability. I'm not attempting to compare Slughorn to Snape as teachers. I honestly believe that snape has the superior talent and dedication as a teacher, but that does Harry no good because Snape behaves like a childish brat around him. Singling him out for humiliation, dropping a perfectly good potion, or assinging him to cut for Malfoy so that Harry *doesn't* get the mark he deserves over and over again. It still stands that Slughorns experienced presence made it a little bit safer for everyone when Harry used the Princes notes for potions, just in case, unlike the situation with the spells, which Harry tried just about anytime anywhere. > Carol: > Hermione, who has half-finished her antidote comprising fifty-two > ingredients (with no help from any textbook because she understands > both the principle and the procedure) gets no credit at all. Forgive > me for indulging my feelings here, Mike and Steve and Valky, but > it's monstrously unfair. Valky: Yes I agree, but Hermione does get over it, it must have hurt a lot when she was caught up in the moment, but there is no way Harry is trying to deny how brilliant Hermione is and she really does know that, even Slughorn can appreciate her aptitude, he does favour her into the Slug Club. Yes it's a bit sad for Hermione, who copped it from Snape and then had her moment stolen by Harry's persistence with Snapes notes, I feel for her, honestly, but I think she is wise enough to let it go in the end anyway, the things she values most highly when it comes to the crunch are not books and cleverness, but friendship, courage and .... you know the rest. Both Hermione and Ron are more than happy to give up school at the end of HBP. Hermione! who once said expelled was worse than dead, is in this for the long haul at the expense of her beloved learning, and even for the moments that are entirely too frustrating and painful, but part of standing by her friend who she values more highly than any of those other things. > Carol: > Exactly. *Harry* know that he's not a Potions genius. So do Ron and > Hermione (and Draco, who's smouldering with anger at the end of the > antidote lesson, just as Harry would be if Draco had gotten away > with that cheeky pseudo-solution). Would anyone be praising Draco's > resourcefulness if the book had fallen into his hands rather than > Harry's? I think not, even though he's quite literally under a death > threat to himself and his parents, giving up Quidditch and not doing > his Transfiguration homework so that he can work on the cabinet. Not > commendable, of course. I'm not feeling sorry for Draco for getting > himself into such a mess, assuming that he volunteered the > information on the Vanishing Cabinets out of revenge for his > father's arrest, but he *is* operating under duress Valky: I'm sure nobody would praise Draco if he used it, No. I'm not even praising Harry for that matter. He lied, he was thoughtless of his friends, he took major risks with his life and the lives of those around him. He wasn't an angel or anything. I'm sure if DD or MacGonagall had the time and knowledge of what he was up to, at their disposal, they'd have kicked him royally in the behind for it and I would have cheered. I simply refute point blank that he wanted or cared about having a glowing reputation in the greater scheme of his life, it's just ludicrous to even imagine. Carol: > and Harry, Chosen One or no, is noth > thinking about death or danger that I can see. Valky: Whaaaaa? You must be joking. > Carol: > I don't see why people (not you, Magpie!) are still doing > the same thing Slughorn is doing and crediting him with a talent he > doesn't have and hard work he hasn't done, alternately with "it's > okay to take shortcuts because he's dying"--a thought we never hear > from Harry himself. > > Valky: I didn't say it's okay to take shortcuts, I said it wasn't the easy choice to take shortcuts. Those are two different things. I have said time and time again, that I don't think Harry couldn't have been wrong about it. He was wrong he made a plethora of mistakes. Valky taing great pains to point out that my original point was regards to right vs easy and not patting Harry on the back for a blunder.